► Show Top 10 Hot Links

Archive for the ‘DHS’ Category

Mars Attacks: Here are the Results of Government Run Healthcare

by Deplorable Martian Overlord ( 72 Comments › )
Filed under Blogmocracy, Communism, Crime, DHS, Education, Europe, Fascism, Free Speech, government, Guest Post, Health Care, Healthcare, Liberal Fascism, Politics, Socialism, UK at March 9th, 2016 - 6:00 am

http://www.buzzfeed.com/patricksmith/make-room-for-matthew#.nxE62kKQq

Buzzfeed is usually reliably liberal, but this article is a huge wake-up call to those who say we must have the government involved in healthcare. Warning to all who have autistic relatives like I do, this article is your worst nightmares come true. We must use our brains this election or our future is Englands present. Unfortunately the solution reached in this article is “more government”, England is doomed. Handing more power to the people who caused the problem in the first place is just asking for more problems.

This Is How An Autistic Child Is Being Kept In “Prison” Under The Mental Health Act

Matthew Garnett, 15, who is autistic and has learning disabilities, has been detained in a psychiatric intensive-care unit for the last six months against his family’s wishes. BuzzFeed News investigates why he and children like him end up stuck in a system they can’t control.
posted on Mar. 4, 2016, at 8:24 a.m.
Patrick Smith

Robin Garnett still has the bite marks from when his son attacked him. On 4 September last year, Matthew, 15, became upset then punched and head-butted his dad and said he wanted to kill him. When the police arrived they found Robin with blood dripping from various wounds. They handcuffed Matthew, who is autistic and has learning disabilities, and took him to hospital.

Matthew’s family agreed with the police and doctors that he should be detained under the Mental Health Act while appropriate treatment for him could be found.

But the mental scars of what happened next will take a lot longer to heal. Since that day, his family say, he has been kept “in prison” against their wishes.
The Garnett family

Friday marks six months since the day Matthew was taken to a psychiatric intensive care unit (PICU) – essentially the mental health equivalent of an accident and emergency department – in Woking, Surrey, up to two hours’ drive away from the Garnett family home in south London.

Robin and Isabelle, Matthew’s mum, were told he would be in Woking for six to eight weeks at the most while a suitable clinical placement within the NHS could be found. He’s been there ever since, and hasn’t received the treatment he needs or been properly assessed, the family say.

After the Garnetts launched a Change.org petition that’s now been signed by over 140,000 people and Matthew’s plight was brought up in parliament, NHS England confirmed to BuzzFeed News on Friday that he will be offered a place at a specialist hospital in Northampton “in a matter of weeks”, albeit on a date yet to be decided.

Robin told BuzzFeed News the Northampton offer sounded positive but said the family are “cautious” due to their level of trust in the system being so low. “We’ve heard it all before, but I hope this time it’s different,” he said. “Even if that is the case, there’s a long way to go and there are a lot of other Matthews out there.”
Change.org

The Department of Health told BuzzFeed News it was looking into the matter “urgently”.

Despite signs of progress in Matthew’s campaign, questions remain over how and why he was placed in the facility for so long. His parents say he regressed while in the PICU and needs urgent treatment for neurological changes that are taking place.

The family’s petition has joined a growing chorus of charities and campaigners calling on the government and the NHS to do more to stop autistic children and children with learning disabilities getting stuck in a bureaucratic limbo that takes them away from their family and restricts access to treatment.

Matthew’s case has drawn attention to the many other children who have been detained under the Mental Health Act in temporary assessment centres for years due to what campaigners call an unacceptable flaw in the way mental health services are commissioned in the UK. Some 3,500 people with learning disabilities, including 165 children, are currently occupying inpatient beds rather than living in their communities, according to the 2015 Learning Disability Census. However, the number of those who are stuck in assessment centres is simply unknown.

So how does a child with a serious mental illness end up detained in a temporary facility for months or even years and denied the treatment and care they clearly need?
The Garnett family

At first the Garnetts could understand why Matthew was sectioned: He needed help, he needed assessing and treating. Plus they had little choice – it wasn’t the first time Matthew had become violent at home, the family were concerned about the wellbeing of Matthew’s younger sister, and the only other option was for him to be arrested by police.

Matthew’s situation was made more serious by the way his condition has developed in the last few years. Once a bright, chatty boy who loved music and swimming, his IQ has fallen to 55, having been as high as 88 at the age of 7. His family think the onset of puberty has something to do with it, but say there is “something big” happening that’s not being properly monitored.

His family describe him as a 5-year-old in a young adult’s body, and despite the challenges they’ve faced, his dad said he is still an “absolute joy” to be around.

Robin showed BuzzFeed News a video of his son on Father’s Day in which Matthew spontaneously improvises a song. “You’re the best daddy in the world, Daddy,” he sings.
The Garnett family

Sat in the kitchen of the family home, Robin said: “He’s nearly my height [6’3”], he’s a hulking 15-year-old, but he’s a child inside. By that point [4 September] there were seven security people marching him to this thing and he was this lost boy who wasn’t any danger to anyone.

“He’d done a thing that was very violent and that triggered various protocols. It’s basically like putting a confused 5-year-old in prison for six months and expecting him to be fine.

“We had a child who was trying to kill us. In his own words, he was trying to kill us. So we agreed at that point but on the understanding that he was going to this place in the short term as a stepping-stone to the assessment and treatment that everyone is agreed he needs.

“He was not a well child then – he’s an even less well child now. We thought this would be a few days before he was taken to a new place.”

However, Matthew has regressed in the PICU and needs urgent assessment and treatment that the centre simply can’t provide, his family say. He has autistic catatonia, meaning he is at times withdrawn and silent. He is confused and unsure what is happening and when he will come home. He has asked more than once whether he is in prison.

His head has been shaved because he was tearing his hair out, and he suffered a compound fracture in his wrist after a scuffle with another inpatient in the PICU. Matthew’s family say he wasn’t being supported in turn-taking while playing on the Nintendo Wii and was pushed over by a bigger boy. Staff only took him to A&E after 24 hours, the Garnetts say.

Matthew, who also has ADHD, has been given family-size bottles of Coke at night and does little other than play on the Wii, his family say.

“The least well-equipped person in the world to deal with this sort of uncertainty is a child with autism,” said Robin. “He looks to us for certainty and we can’t give him any.”

Robin asked what the outcry would be if someone with a physical health emergency was treated the same way: “Can you imagine them saying ‘you’ve got a broken leg but we won’t get round to it for six months’?”
The Garnett family

Isabelle, Matthew’s mum, is angry, upset, and frustrated. “What crime do you have to commit to be detained for six months?” she said. “What crime? It would appear that you can be detained indefinitely if you have autism. And it stinks.” The family say the whole episode is affecting their own health.

Shortly after Christmas, Isabelle had planned to take Matthew to the cinema. She’d made a lot of phone calls and followed the lengthy protocol that such an off-site trip involves. Yet when she arrived to collect him, a member of staff had booked him a hospital appointment instead. No one had explained the change of plan to Matthew.

“He was in fight-or-flight then,” she said. “He was so agitated that the minute he saw me he attacked me.”

Despite hardly recognising the previously animated and talkative boy she once knew, Isabelle said doctors in the centre have told her: “Oh he’s fine, he’s really bouncy.” This is because his ADHD is going untreated, she said.

One doctor told the family that it costs as much as £1,000 a day to keep Matthew in the PICU, a figure the NHS would neither confirm nor deny when BuzzFeed News asked.

Cygnet Healthcare, which runs the facility in Woking as well as centres in 18 other locations across the country, declined to comment on any specific details related to Matthew’s detention, but said in a statement:

“We support some very vulnerable people to whom we have a duty of care, a key part of which is respecting patients’ confidentiality. Therefore, it would not be appropriate for us to comment on an individual case.

“Our primary purpose is to assist individuals with crisis support, stabilising them ahead of admission to a clinical mental health treatment and support service. Where a placement at a specialist service is not immediately available, a clinical decision is taken which may decide the most appropriate alternative is for the individual to remain in our care until a space does become available.”

In a Care Quality Commission report based on an inspection in February 2015, the Woking centre was found to have failed in four areas, including not having staff “who are properly qualified and able to do their job” and not providing “safe and appropriate care that meets [patients’] needs and supports their rights”.

In the 14 months to 31 December, Cygnet made £118 million in revenue and £31.6 million in pre-tax profits.
The Garnett family

Beyond this family’s personal trauma, Matthew’s story shows the labyrinthine ways NHS services are commissioned and how families can be left confused and concerned.
The Garnett family

Matthew is due to be headed to St Andrew’s hospital in Northampton in a few weeks. The place would have been available sooner if it weren’t for five young inpatients there who have been waiting for a care package to be offered to them in the communities they come from.

Three of those five turned 18 while at St Andrews, meaning they graduated from the child and adolescent mental health services and now face a whole new layer of bureaucracy from the adult services. This is the NHS mental health commissioning merry-go-round.

NHS England confirmed to us that it pays for Matthew’s treatment, not his local NHS trust. Critics say this funding arrangement could be bringing perverse incentives into play where a person is detained even though they could be supported back home in their community.

Tom Purser, community campaigns manager at the National Autistic Society (NAS), told BuzzFeed News that Matthew’s case, and those of the five who were waiting to leave Northampton, highlights a commissioning system that doesn’t serve people with specific mental health needs.

“It could suggest that the local commissioners are happy to leave people in places where they are being supported being paid for out of a completely separate budget,” he said, “and it means they don’t have to worry about putting a package together which will either come from local NHS or local authority budgets.

“This is slightly speculative, but there is no great incentive for local commissioners to bring people back into their communities, because they will require extensive packages to arrange.

“And these things can take a long time to arrange and can be very difficult when you have someone with very specialist needs.”

Purser said the NAS is calling for a full review of the way mental health services are commissioned in the UK in regards to autistic children.

South London and Maudsley NHS Trust said in a statement that it was working with the Garnett family on this case, adding: “There are only a limited number of units in England that can address this young person’s complex needs. These units are not best placed geographically for this family and young person.”

A spokesperson for NHS England told BuzzFeed News: “We have every sympathy for Matthew and his family and we understand that this has been a very difficult time. It has been confirmed that Matthew will be moved to St Andrew’s, where he will be able to receive the specialist care that he needs. We anticipate that this will happen in a matter of weeks but cannot confirm an admission date at this point.”

It turns out six months is not even that long when it comes to children being detained in assessment centres.

Josh Wills, who is severely autistic, was 12 when he was admitted to hospital in his native Cornwall because he was hitting himself so hard he lost a third of his tongue.

There was no treatment and assessment centre available in Cornwall, so he was taken to one in Birmingham. He was there for three years and released at the end of 2015, aged 15.

“We decided we needed some help,” his dad, Phill Wills, told BuzzFeed News. “He was 11 when he really started injuring himself.

“It was during the Olympics, I was with friends watching Usain Bolt doing the 100-metre sprint and my phone went and it was Josh’s mum saying he was in hospital. That was the last time that he stayed in any of our houses.

“He was three months in the hospital in Cornwall. His behaviour was classed as life-threatening and he was only 12. He had some surgery, he lost one-third of his tongue, he lost most of his lip, he had a hole in his cheek, all through what he was doing to himself. Sometimes I wouldn’t have been able to pick him out of a lineup.”

Wills was told Josh would only be there for 12 weeks. But that became six months, then a year. Wills and Josh’s mum drove more than 200,000 miles over the course of his detention.

Like Matthew Garnett’s parents, Wills agreed to his son’s sectioning at first as the only available option, but then became frustrated with the lack of movement and action in finding him a placement in his home county.

And like the Garnetts, Wills started campaigning with a petition on Change.org, which ended up getting 250,000 signatures. That got the story air time on BBC News at Six and BBC News at Ten, as well as This Morning. The then care minister, Norman Lamb, intervened and eventually Josh was offered a residential place with two full-time carers in Cornwall, 12 miles from his family home.

“It was the petition that turned it all around for us,” said Wills. “It went live on 26 March 2014, which was 18 months into his Birmingham stay. We just didn’t feel that we and Josh were being listened to. If you don’t listen to the parents of Josh and Matthew, you’re not listening to the children.

“We never expected to go as public as we did. I didn’t expect to be getting hugs from Holly Willoughby.

“No one should have to shout as loud as we did, just to be heard. I don’t blame anyone locally really. Norman Lamb did everything he could and it still took a long time for the wheels to start turning.

“I hope to god that Matthew’s case moves faster than ours did.”
Phill Wills

But what can be done to make sure this kind of thing doesn’t happen again?

Charlotte Haworth Hird, an associate at law firm Bindmans who has advised on a range of mental health cases, including ones related to detention, said detention under the Mental Health Act “trumps” all other rights that a person might have. Essentially, as long as physicians agree that someone is at risk to themselves or others, they can be detained on an ongoing basis.

The key to stopping children like Matthew being detained for such lengthy periods, she told BuzzFeed News, is intervention in the community to stop young people falling into crisis.

“Children in cases like this end up being detained in the same way anyone gets detained – there can often a crisis point,” she said. “But one of the concerns, and this is often the experience of families, is that crisis point only arrives because of a lack of support being provided in the community.

“So it’s necessary to look further back to see if detention can be prevented by better community support from the local NHS trust or social services. My experience from working with families is that if you look at the bigger picture there are points at which there could have been proper intervention, so it never needed to get to the point where someone goes to hospital.”

Last month a report from Sir Stephen Bubb, chief executive of charity leaders’ body ACEVO, into the Winterbourne View scandal in 2011 – when undercover journalists documented systemic abuse at a home for people with learning disabilities – recommended that a commissioner be appointed to promote the rights of people with learning disabilities and their families.

Bubb said the 3,500 people with learning disabilities in inpatient care was an underestimate and called for more to be done. NHS England noted in response to that report that “no one should try and defend the indefensible when it comes to outmoded patterns of institutionalisation”.

Jan Tregelles, CEO of Mencap, the learning disabilities charity, and Viv Cooper, CEO of the Challenging Behaviour Foundation, said in a joint statement to BuzzFeed News:

“People with a learning disability and their families have endured five years of failure by national and local government and the NHS to bring about meaningful change for the 3,500 people confined to inpatient units in England.

“Despite promises to move people out of inpatient units and ensure they get the right support in their local communities, many people are still stuck in these units, where they are at increased risk of abuse and neglect and often unacceptably far from loved ones. Perhaps most shocking is the fact that 165 of these people are children under the age of 18.”

“The latest NHS England’s commitment to close inpatient beds over the next three years will only be credible if it actually leads to change on the ground for people with a learning disability. Hospitals are not homes. Families need to see the right support developed in their local communities. This means the right housing, staff with the right skills and with the right expertise, who can support individuals, families and care providers.”

The Department of Health said in a statement: “It’s crucial children with mental illness get the right care in the right place – change is already underway to make that happen. We are investing £1.4 billion into young people’s mental health and are working with local areas to improve services so young people get better quality, preventative mental health care as quickly as possible.”
Patrick Smith is a senior reporter for BuzzFeed News and is based in London.
Contact Patrick Smith at patrick.smith@buzzfeed.com.

Mars Attacks: Awareness of Impairment Part 2: A Five point Action Plan

by Deplorable Martian Overlord ( 177 Comments › )
Filed under Academia, Charity, Crime, Cult of Obama, DHS, Education, Health Care at January 13th, 2016 - 6:00 am

This article from National Review brings up many valid points. The President, if he wasn’t a demagogue, should be appealing to the country to do something about the mental health issues that are behind gun violence, not some feel good BS gun control mandates. We are wasting huge sums of money in treating mental illness that amounts to nothing more than “mommy didn’t hug me enough” and not enough dealing with the people in the community with the largest threat of violence against themselves or others. Let me be clear though, this writers solution of more federal intervention is not a plan I would endorse. The federal government has a bad way of destroying anything it touches and this is a path back to the old “State Hospital” system that was such a nightmare last century. Not to mention that with the kind of people running are government I bet their definition of “severe Mental Illness” will differ greatly from ours. IE see my earlier articles showing how many different psychiatric publications are trying to get Conservative thought labeled as mental illness.

Five-Point Action Plan for President Obama to Reduce Violence by the Mentally Ill
by D. J. Jaffe December 17, 2012 12:00 AM
President Obama said the federal government has to do something meaningful to prevent future shootings, like the recent massacre of 26 children and adults at a school in Newtown, Connecticut. Here is what the federal government can do to prevent violence related to mental illness:

1. Start demonstration projects of Assisted Outpatient Treatment (e.g. Kendra’s Law in New York, Laura’s Law in California) throughout the country. AOT allows courts to order individuals with mental illness to stay in treatment as a condition of living in the community. It is only applicable to the most seriously ill who have a history of violence, incarceration, or needless hospitalizations. AOT is proven to keep patients, the public, and police safer. The Department of Justice has certified AOT as an effective crime-prevention program. But mental-health departments are reluctant to implement AOT because it forces them to focus on the most seriously ill. Demonstration projects would help mental-health departments see the advantage of the program. (For why some people with serious mental illness refuse treatment, see this. See also how Assisted Outpatient Treatment laws (Kendra’s Law in NY and Laura’s Law in CA) keep patients, the pubic and police safer
2. Write exceptions into the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) so parents of mentally ill children can get access to medical records and receive information from their children’s doctors on what is wrong and what the children need. Right now, for reasons of “confidentiality,’ doctors won’t tell parents what is wrong with their kids or what treatment they need, even as they require parents to provide the care. As a result, when a child goes off treatment, the parents’ hands are tied. They have all the responsibility to see the person is cared for, but none of the information or authority to see it happens. We have to change the patient confidentiality laws so parents can help prevent tragedies rather than become a punching bag for the public when something horrific happens.

3. End the Institutes for Mental Disease (IMD) exclusion in Medicaid law. This provision tells states: “If you kick someone out of the hospital, we will pay you 50% of the community care costs.” This causes states to lock the front door of hospitals and open the back door, regardless of whether the community is an appropriate setting. If you have a disease in any organ of your body, other than the brain, and need long-term hospital care, Medicaid pays. Failing to pay when the illness is in the brain is federal discrimination against persons with mental illness. I wrote on Medicaid discrimination for the mass market in the Washington Post, but John Edwards wrote a more scholarly paper on ending the IMD Exclusion. Relatedly, a proposal made by former vice-presidential candidate Ryan, under which Medicaid was block-granted could solve this problem.

4. Create a federal definition of serious mental illness, and require that the vast majority of mental-health funding go to it. Due to mission creep and the tendency to diagnose normal reactions of people as a mental “health” issue, government agencies now claim that 40 percent or more of Americans have a mental ‘health’ issue. Worst, most mental “health” funding currently goes to this group of the highest functioning. But only 5 to 9 percent of Americans have a serious mental illness. That’s where we should be spending our money — on the 5 to 9 percent who are most likely to become violent and need help, not the worried well. There is more than enough money in the mental-health system to prevent Newtown-type incidents, provided it is spent on people who are truly ill, not the worried-well. I wrote on this for a mass market on Huffington Post, but a much more scholarly paper was written by Howard H. Goldman and Gerald N. Grob. With the fiscal cliff approaching, prioritizing the most seriously mentally ill for services is more important than ever.

5. Eliminate the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Agency (SAMHSA). SAMHSA is the epicenter of what is wrong with the American mental-health system. SAMHSA actively encourages states to engage in mission creep and send the most seriously ill to the end of the line. They provide massive funding to organizations that want to prevent mentally ill individuals from receiving treatment. They have nothing positive to show for their efforts in spite of a massive bureaucracy that meets and meets and meets and never accomplishes anything. I wrote on this for a mass market in the Washington Times and Huffington Post. But Amanda Peters wrote a terrific scholarly piece on SAMHSA for a law journal.

If Obama is serious about wanting to do something, the steps above would be the best first step. True, the mental-health industry may throw a fit as they find themselves obligated to serve the most seriously ill, but it’s the right thing to do. Anything else could be deadly. Here is what states should do. States should make greater use of Assisted Outpatient Treatment, especially for those with a history of violence or incarceration. AOT allows courts to order certain mentally ill people to stay in treatment as a condition of living in the community. AOT works. New Yorkers remember Larry Hogue, the “Wild Man of 96th Street,” who kept getting hospitalized, going off meds, terrorizing neighbors, and going back into the hospital. Connecticut does NOT have an AOT law on the books (see these facts about the Connecticut mental-health system), and we can’t say for sure if it would have helped in this case, but all states should have one to prevent similar incidents. • ?States should make sure their civil-commitment laws include all the following, not just “danger to self or others: (A) Is “gravely disabled”, which means that the person is substantially unable, except for reasons of indigence, to provide for any of his or her basic needs, such as food, clothing, shelter, health or safety, or (B) is likely to “substantially deteriorate” if not provided with timely treatment, or ?(C) lacks capacity, which means that as a result of the brain disorder, the person is unable to fully understand or lacks judgment to make an informed decision regarding his or her need for treatment, care, or supervision.? • When the “dangerousness standard” is used, it must be interpreted more broadly than “imminently” and/or “provably” dangerous. State laws should also allow for consideration of a patient’s record in making determinations about court-ordered treatment, since history is often a reliable way to anticipate the future course of illness. (Currently, it is like criminal procedures: what you did in the past presumably has no bearing, so the court may not know past history when deciding whether to commit someone. In fact, there are ways to know which mentally ill individuals become or are likely to become violent.)

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/335767/five-point-action-plan-president-obama-reduce-violence-mentally-ill-d-j-jaffe

I would recommend reading the article at the link since there are several very informative links within it.

Not Afraid Of The Lax Rules Involved With Federal Agencies? Get A Load Of This.

by Flyovercountry ( 116 Comments › )
Filed under Barack Obama, Democratic Party, DHS, Economy, Progressives, Regulation at June 23rd, 2014 - 7:00 am

I’ve written about this before, the evils perpetrated upon our constitutional republic by establishing federal agencies as a substitute for the framework of governance originally established by our founding national law. Federal agencies have effectively swept away all vestiges of the checks and balances system, and have done more to concentrate power within the federal behemoth than the election of 10 Barack Obamas consecutively could ever achieve.

Our very first federal agency was the Interstate Commerce Commission, established in February of 1887. The act granting authority to establish this agency established something called agency law. The Act itself was worded purposefully vague, and granted the agency authority to write its own rules, manage the enforcement of those rules, and depended upon the Judiciary for what little check on its power the weakest branch of our government would care to muster. The Judiciary of course elected to defer such oversight authority, deferring in almost all instances to the, “wisdom of the experts within the agencies themselves,” for such matters. With that almost exclusively followed path set forth then, continued to this day without interruption, all federal agencies effectively have the power of all three branches of our federal behemoth, concentrated within the hegemony of the current bureaucracy. What’s worse, since it is nearly impossible to fire federal workers, that bureaucracy remains in place and devoted to its own belief system, irrespective of which leadership team to manage the whole mess is actually decided upon by the American People. If for example Conservatives win national elections, the federal agencies will undoubtedly continue to run with a decidedly liberal bent, they’ll just be a little more discreet about it for 4 or 8 years.

it’s taken a while, 127 years to be more specific about it, but this very week, one of those newly formed agencies showed perfectly, why we should all be very terrified.

From the Town Hall article linked to above:

Last week the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, through the power of Dodd-Frank, passed a rule giving the agency unprecedented power to shut down businesses, no matter what the reason, at any time it wishes through a cease-and-desist order. Further, the rule puts businesses at the mercy of the CFPB and they cannot go back into operation until government approval or a court ruling is made over an issue. Subsequently because bureaucratic decisions and court rulings take a substantial amount of time to happen, businesses cannot survive during those waiting periods. Here are the details (emphasis mine):

In a notice published in today’s Federal Register, the CFPB has announced that it has adopted its interim final rule on temporary cease-and-desist orders (C&Ds) without change. The final rule takes effect on July 18, 2014.

The CFPB is authorized to issue temporary C&Ds under Section 1053(c) of Dodd-Frank. That provision authorizes a temporary C&D as an adjunct to a cease-and-desist proceeding brought under Section 1053 against a covered person or service provider. A temporary C&D is effective immediately upon service and remains in effect unless modified or terminated administratively by the CFPB or set aside on judicial review.

Reasons!? Reasons!? They don’t need no stinking reason to shut you down! This latest rule of course is being inflicted now to threaten banks who do business with gun dealers and manufacturers. So, rather than inflict gun control, which is prohibited by our Second Amendment, and further, is opposed by the vast majority of American citizens, they’ll just make certain that gun shops can not participate in the market place of capital commerce. They won’t be able to process credit card payments, deposit checks, or cash, or use checking accounts to pay their bills and such. All of course because the CCFB has granted itself this authority, and it’ll doubtless take the Judiciary a decade or so to sort it out, assuming that our weakest branch of government even cares to do so.

On Father’s day I had a conversation with a liberal. I reminded him that the entire purpose of the Second Amendment was to protect the citizens of the newly formed nation from any future government tyranny, so that the federal government would always be as afraid of its citizens as the citizens were of the government. He immediately quipped, as if I would be silly to consider that necessary today, “do you even think that’s an issue now?” When I answered you bet, he labeled me a fringe radical fanatic. (I love that softball opportunity to slap someone down by the way.) So I of course asked if his definition of a fringe radical was someone who did not wish to live under the societal rules that he agreed with and sought to inflict. That was a conversation ending question, and it felt good. This latest bit, something I wish I had in my arsenal a week ago, is that perfect example of government tyranny run completely amok.

Make no mistake about it however, this is something far bigger than the threat to use a back door method to inflict gun control. It is far bigger even than the CCFB. It is the agency system of governance itself that must be dealt with. The only President ever, who attempted to do something to reign in the out of control behemoth that our federal agencies have become, was Richard Nixon. This, as much as anything, was a reason for why he was so hated by the political left. We need the political will and fortitude not seen since Reagan to do that, and I actually have someone in mind. We’ll be discussing that on Monday. I’m going out on a limb and making an endorsement, even before anyone declares for the upcoming 2016 bloodbath.

Cross Posted from Musings of a Mad Conservative.

Uh, What!?

by Flyovercountry ( 140 Comments › )
Filed under Barack Obama, Communism, Democratic Party, DHS, Economy, Progressives at May 20th, 2014 - 9:00 am

IMG_0275
A picture of the Department of Agriculture’s latest acquisition.

Many of you may remember those heady days of 2008, when some of us were sounding the alarm bells about the dangers of an Obama Presidency. “Back away from the Fox News,” was sounded like some sort of dismissive automatic suppression system. “If you listen to Fox News, you’re only getting lies, Senator Obama has no wish to inflict Socialism or any form of top down government control upon the masses. He will be a benevolent and kind Messiah.” What scared us the most, were the things he himself said, and things by the way that were only ever repeated on Fox News, things like the following:

Under President Obama, the Department of Education now has armed officers, in case any of you got the bright idea of failing to repay those student loans. Forest Rangers now have guns, in case you suddenly get the urge to smoke a cigarette out in the woods when you believe no one to be looking. The census bureau I’m sure wishes the right to shoot anyone who might seek to have their conservative leaning suburban homestead adequately represented when drawing up congressional districts. The Department of Transportation will need to deal with those gas guzzlers who drive Hummers without being famous Hollywood types first somehow, and shooting them will help thwart global warming in its tracks. Lord knows that the fellows in the Department of Commerce will need guns to help them deal with the black marketeers who inevitably spring up from no where any time Socialism becomes the economic system of choice. And farming community, don’t worry, there’s something under the Christmas tree for you as well.

The United States Department of Agriculture has declared its intent to purchase .40 cal Smith & Wesson submachine guns.

In an announcement on the procurement branch of the General Services Administration’s website, the USDA has claimed it wishes to buy semi-automatic or burst fire machine guns with night sights and flashlight attachments.

Now, I know what you’re thinking. What could possibly go wrong with giving automatic weapons to the same people who made it possible for you to pay over $50 Billion in reparations to any African American who claimed to have tried growing a tomato plant on their balcony and failed at it, aka, “failed to farm?” I say you’re a racist for objecting to anything that the Bamster has it in his mind to do, ever. I mean after all, he’s nothing short of a beneficent Messiah, who really really cares about all of us personally. Let’s meet one of those new armed USDA agents now, shall we?

I know I feel safe, knowing that we have an armed civilian security force that answers only to President Zero. What did the WWII era Germans call their armed civilian security force again?…. I believe it was called the Gestapo.

Cross Posted from Musings of a Mad Conservative.