FM: DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

SUBJ: NATIONWIDE ALERT – KNOW RIGHT WING EXTREMISTS BY THEIR BUMPER STICKERS!

Per the Guidelines of the Department of Homeland Security’s recent report, all units and law enforcement agencies are notified to be on the lookout (BOLO) for potential Right-Wing Extremists. Since the report’s guidelines are exceedingly general and non-specific, we here at DHS will provide the necessary details in order for state and local LE officials to round up the usual suspects.

Usual Suspect

First, Right-Wing Extremists are often known to display their radical sympathies on bumper stickers. This could be as simple a matter as a Confederate flag on a pickup truck, but often involves stated extremist messages like ABORTION KILLS, BABIES ARE NOT SPARE PARTS (they are), and ADOPTION: THE CARING OPTION (it isn’t, spare parts is).

In this instance, it is best to keep a safe distance and follow the unsub’s vehicle, to where fellow right-wing extremists of like mind are no doubt plotting their next abortion clinic massacre.

In the case of bumper stickers like I’D RATHER BE TRIED BY TWELVE THAN CARRIED BY SIX, or I’LL GIVE YOU MY GUN WHEN YOU TAKE IT FROM MY COLD DEAD HANDS, once again, keep a safe distance and follow the unsub’s vehicle to the Timothy McVeigh-influenced militia group of which they are a part.

If you see bumper stickers such as WHAT PART OF ILLEGAL DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND, AMNESTY SUCKS or SPEAK ENGLISH, these messages indicate strong nationalist, and most likely racist, tendencies of the unsubs driving these vehicles.

Stop the vehicle and ask the driver just what exactly he/she meant by it. On the off-chance the driver is an illegal alien, and the bumper sticker a remnant of its past right-wing extremist owner, follow standard procedure and give the undocumented immigrant a pass, no questions asked.

Some Right-Wing Extremist bumper stickers indicate hostility toward the Federal Government, and even the Obamamessiah himself. It is these radicals who represent the most clear and present danger to our Republic, as well as to law enforcement officers themselves. Let’s face it. If they don’t love Washington, you think they care about cops?

Such bumper messages as TIME FOR A TEA PARTY, DON’T TAX ME, BRO, PORKULUS PIG, DON’T BLAME ME, I VOTED FOR McCAIN, or other similar anti-government and anti-Messiah messages, should be a red flag to all LE officers nationwide. Approach with extreme caution. Deadly Force is authorized. It may have taken us a few days to authorize the killing of pirates, but we know who the real enemies of America are here. You have Carte Blanche.

Should you encounter any bumper stickers indicating military service, unit designation, or general pro-military sympathies, flip a coin. They could go either way.

Though you may encounter some extremist-appearing bumper stickers like KILL BUSH, NO BLOOD FOR OIL, WHO WOULD JESUS TORTURE, WAR IS NOT PRO-LIFE, LA RAZA, BILL AYERS IS THE BOMB or bumper stickers that bear the Aztlan or ‘reconquista’ emblem, ignore them.

Those aren’t the droids we’re looking for.

Relax…this is not another NAMBLA story but give me a break. If you spent three years infiltrating a group of pedophiles you’d have a few stories serving as life lessons.

NAMBLA has a magazine but not a centerfold. If they did my nominee would be John from San Francisco. He was truly one of the more interesting characters I met at the Miami NAMBLA conference. Heavyset, in his late fifties, with his Mohawk hairstyle, a bad case of dandruff, earrings, shorts, and black knee high socks he made quite a fashion statement whenever he entered a room. John identified himself as a “gaythiest.”  He had been to prison twice for child molestation and was caught a third time but for some unstated reason the victim refused to cooperate with the police. John admitted to being “out as a gay” and “out as an atheist” but “those things are different. You go around saying you like to run your hands through a little boy’s hair, or you like to kiss him or do other things like that, it doesn’t get the same reaction.” My only response is, “dah!”

What John also said was he used to live on the streets of Miami but moved to San Francisco because the public assistance was more lucrative in California. Another unforgettable character was Sam from Albuquerque. Sam was a three-time loser and thanks to our sting, was sentenced to thirty years. Sam, a former special education teacher and a member of the NAMBLA steering committee, their governing body, moved from Colorado to New Mexico because the Land of Enchantment had a reputation for being more sex offender friendly. Okay, Hamer, so get to the point.

As a Marine Corps officer and FBI agent I took an oath “to protect and defend” the Constitution. Just the other day I decided to re-read it. It really is an amazing document. It isn’t that long and seems pretty clear. As I read it, the Founding Fathers wanted to limit the powers of the federal government. The states were given most of the powers. Throughout our nation’s history the states have been independent experiments in democracies. Many programs instituted at the federal level or adopted by other states were the results of an individual state’s innovation.  Article I, Sections 8 and 9 enumerate the powers of Congress. Both parties have played upon the “general welfare” phrase and expanded the federal role. The feds have their hands in everything from education to health care to farming to banking to a lot of other areas not covered by the document. 

We can debate whether the Constitution is a “contract” or “a breathing living document.” Debate can be healthy. But today it seems like Congress wants to legislate everything but mandatory two-ply toilet paper.

This past week Congressman Paul Ryan in discussing the Republican’s alternative to the President’s stimulus package, said part of the reform would be converting Medicaid to an allotment to let states and governors enact programs most efficient for each state’s unique needs.

Rush Limbaugh threatened to sell his residence and move his Northern Command broadcast facilities from New York because of proposed state and local tax increases. His new home would be a state friendlier to business.

As I read it, all of this is part of the Founding Fathers’ Plan. Limit the feds, give the states the power, let them experiment, let them compete, and maybe they can build a better mousetrap. Otherwise, if it were one size fits all, Miami would still have the John the child molester living within its city limits and Sam would have never left Colorado.

Sean Penn scolded opponents of something he called “Gay Marriage.” Apparently, he thinks gay marriage was made illegal in California. Certainly Sean, a lifelong resident of Hollywood, should recognize that gay marriage is perfectly legal and has roots all the way back to Cole Porter and Rock Hudson, both of whom are gay men who married (and wasn’t Penn married to Madonna?).

What’s not legal is same-sex marriage.

Currently, we recognize the ability for states to define the restrictions on people applying for marriage licenses.  Right now in America the standard state requirements for marriage are almost universally the following:

1. Two
2. Unmarried
3. Unrelated
4. Consenting
5. Adult
6. Humans
7. Of Different genders

Please note that five of the seven requirements have not always been mandatory. At certain points in history the top five (maybe six) traditional marriage requirements were not in place. (I’m having a hard time verifying number six– my Google just won’t go there without leaving a history trail I don’t want on my permanent record.) I also suggest that very few proponents of same-sex marriage would allow the other six requirements to be waived as nonchalantly as number seven.

Also note that love is not among the requirements. The idea pitched around lately is that the State has no right to keep people who love each other apart. Well, yes they do. Cousin lovers have been denied the right to marry almost everywhere outside of royalty and separatist religious sects. And as many married couples (and divorced people paying alimony) will attest, the State also has the power to keep two people together long after the love has evaporated.

I think we may need a different term. “Same-Sex Marriage” does not roll smoothly off the tongue. I propose we call it something more in line with reality. Perhaps an “Untraditional Marriage,” something I don’t have a problem with. If a State agrees that the traditional restrictions placed on marriages do not fit into modern society (as it did in the past when it banned polygamy and incest), I believe it is within the Constitutional power of the State to change those restrictions. But that’s the big beef I have with proponents of Untraditional Marriage. In every state where it was put on to the ballot, it was soundly defeated. It was only legalized by judges willing to subvert election results.

The side of the aisle whose very name claims to cherish democracy turns against it in droves when the “will of the people” is directed against them.

Maybe that’s why Sean likes Hugo and Fidel so much: they’re all staunch proponents of Untraditional Democracy.