Tag Archives: rights

It’s a Start

Posted on by
Reply

In acknowledgment of the fiasco associated with 2020’s voting machine accessibility from/to the Internet, the Election Assistance Commission, an independent Federal Government facility (and unaffiliated with the Federal Election Commission), has moved to bar any connection with the Internet by a voting machine.

Going forward, vote systems cannot be connected to any digital networks, and wireless technology must be disabled too.

And

The new requirements provide a much more draconian ban on external access to the Internet or other computer networks, a security provision otherwise known as an “air gap.” The commission specifically cited the potential threat posed by foreign adversaries to meddle in elections.

It’s a good start, but it’s insufficient. That air gap can be penetrated, also, by any party interested enough to do so. Computers—any electronic device—emits electromagnetic radiation, particularly radio frequency radiation, and those signals can be received and read. For this reason, our National Security Agency has developed TEMPEST requirements to prevent these signals to be receivable by our foreign adversaries. Of interest here, TEMPEST requires electronic equipment containing or processing information of sufficient security interest to be enclosed inside glorified Faraday cages, which block those electromagnetic signals from escaping the equipment facility.

For the most part, such requirements would seem overkill for a voting center—except for that bit about foreign adversaries looking to meddle in an election. That risk is potentiated by the existence of a potentially highly contentious election, which gives one or another party an interest in…influencing…an election’s votes.

Our voting centers need to address that air gap vulnerability, also.

 

The EAC’s new requirements, in their entirety, can be read here.

How Far

Posted on by
Reply

…has Australia fallen. The once proudly free nation is stooping to this.

The government of South Australia has implemented a new policy requiring Australians to use an app with facial recognition software and geolocation to prove that they are abiding by a 14-day quarantine for travel within the country.

It’s just one state in the nation, but Australia’s central government, with its silence on this move, seems not far behind. Neither will this Big Government Overwatch be limited to quarantine from the Wuhan Virus.

This is a government surveillance regime that would make the Communist Party of China blush.

Thought Police

Posted on by
Reply

They’re metastasizing into the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention published a guide to “inclusive language” in order to promote “health equity” and “inclusive communication.”

For instance, their “Corrections & Detentions” section “suggests”

replacing terms such as “Inmate,” “Prisoner,” “Convict/ex-convict,” and “Criminal” with terms such as “People/persons,” “Persons in pre-trial or with charge,” “Persons on parole or probation,” or “People in immigration detention facilities.”

The problem with euphemisms, though, is that they mean precisely the same as the word they’re intended to replace. Persons on parole or probation still are criminals. That’s the status of folks on parole or probation—they’re still criminals, felons, until they complete their sentences. People in immigration detention facilities remain illegal aliens—that’s why they’re being detained.

The substitutes may soften the language in a misguided attempt to disguise or obfuscate the facts, but that’s only a temporary condition, and the frankness of the underlying meaning ultimately (and quickly) comes through. That’s why there’s a constant search for euphemisms.

The problem with government agents—the men and women who populate government agencies—being the ones pushing for euphemisms is that their push becomes mandates, and government mandates are nothing more than restrictions on free speech, limits on one of our most basic individual liberties. When government agents presume to dictate how we must term concepts, they’re dictating how we must think about them.

Even the worthies in government know that. Which is maybe why they’re making their push.

Government Fiat

Posted on by
Reply

This is what the Progressive-Democrats in charge of our Federal Government are plotting [sic] in the way of drug pricing under Medicare Part D (the drug provision of Medicare), per the Tax Foundation.

Under HR 3 [the Elijah Cummings Lower Drug Costs Now Act], if drug manufacturers do not agree to participate in negotiations, or do not agree to the negotiated price, they would be subject to an escalating excise tax on the sale of the drug in question. The tax would kick in at 65 percent and would rise by 10 percentage points each 90 days the manufacturers are in “noncompliance,” reaching a maximum tax rate of 95%.

What “negotiation?” This is the price we’re negotiating for, says the Health and Human Services Secretary, the Government official that HR3 says will represent the Government.

Here’s our counteroffer, says the drug manufacturer.

No, no, that’s too high, says SecHHS, repeating his original offer. Then he says, Here’s your noncompliance tax.

This isn’t negotiation, yet that’s what will occur, with the Government holding all the cards. Targeted drug manufacturers and sellers would not even be allowed to opt out of Medicare under HR3.

The Tax Foundation is concerned about drug innovation, and rightly so.

I’m also concerned about the fate of free enterprise and of individual freedom.

Progressive-Democrat Controls over Individuals’ Lives

Posted on by
Reply

Here are some of those controls that are buried deep within the bowels of the so-called infrastructure bill just rammed through the senate.

mandate for vehicle manufactures to install “drunk and impaired driving prevention technology” as a standard feature inside of new vehicles

Because all of us are simply too grindingly stupid to make our own decisions about drinking and driving. This is amply proven by the one or two among us who are so stupid, so we all must pay the price.

create a vehicle miles traveled system for taxing drivers based on their annual vehicle mileage is hidden away in the bill’s section 13002, entitled “National motor vehicle per-mile user fee pilot”

This also will create an opening for tracking where we go and who/what we visit in addition to tracking how we travel to get there.

grants select cabinet secretaries the authority to fully fund select infrastructure projects with taxpayer dollars by waiving cost-sharing rules

Just gimme the damned dollars and quit asking pesky questions. We Know Better. Never mind that the need for any of these dollars has yet to be established beyond yelling “Infrastructure,” as though that settles the science.

If these controls really were any good, and if average Americans really did take them seriously, Progressive-Democrats would offer them in separate stand-alone bills for public debate and scrutiny.

More important to the Progressive-Democrats, though, is that these policies vastly increase their surveillance state. Even waiving cost-sharing expands surveillance, since the Secretaries designated The Precious Ones will need to identify whose costs are going to be “saved” and who will be called upon to pick up the cost slack.