AS STUPID AS GIVING UP THE PANAMA CANAL; OBAMACONS GIVE UP U.S. CONTROL OVER THE INTERNET AMERICA'S POLITICAL SYSTEM IS FALTERING -- CORRUPTION AND POLITICS CRIPPLING THE SYSTEM

One Citizen Speaking...

---

• AS STUPID AS GIVING UP THE PANAMA CANAL; OBAMACONS GIVE UP U.S. CONTROL OVER THE INTERNET
• AMERICA'S POLITICAL SYSTEM IS FALTERING -- CORRUPTION AND POLITICS CRIPPLING THE SYSTEM
• CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT 5 -- TOO MUCH EQUALITY OF OPPORTUNITY, NOT ENOUGH EQUALITY OF OUTCOME

AS STUPID AS GIVING UP THE PANAMA CANAL; OBAMACONS GIVE UP U.S. CONTROL OVER THE INTERNET Posted: 16 Mar 2014 06:38 PM PDT While it is certainly true that the revelations of widespread spying and the compromise of key Internet protocols by the National Security Agency, the FBI, and the DEA have sowed fear, uncertainty, and doubt among the world’s netizens … there was no valid reason for he United States to give up control over the Domain Name Server root zone. But, then again, we have a President who does not believe in America’s exceptionalism and wants to fundamentally transform America into just another unexceptional member-state of the United Nations. Albeit, the one developed nation that should fund reparations to lesser developed nations as a penalty for its early “colonialism.” What evil can occur from this “multi-stakeholder” business model is unknown, but can be anticipated if the participants become radicalized by political concerns or actually function on behalf of their sovereign nations rather than for the benefit of the world’s netizens. NTIA Announces Intent to Transition Key Internet Domain Name Functions To support and enhance the multistakeholder model of Internet policymaking and governance, the U.S. Commerce Department’s National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) today announces its intent to transition key Internet domain name functions to the global multi-stakeholder community.  As the first step, NTIA is asking the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) to convene global stakeholders to develop a proposal to transition the current role played by NTIA in the coordination of the Internet’s domain name system (DNS).  NTIA’s responsibility includes the procedural role of administering changes to the authoritative root zone file – the database containing the lists of names and addresses of all top-level domains – as well as serving as the historic steward of the DNS.   NTIA currently contracts with ICANN to carry out the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) functions and has a Cooperative Agreement with Verisign under which it performs related root zone management functions.  Transitioning NTIA out of its role marks the final phase of the privatization of the DNS as outlined by the U.S. Government in 1997. “The timing is right to start the transition process,” said Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Communications and Information Lawrence E. Strickling.  “We look forward to ICANN convening stakeholders across the global Internet community to craft an appropriate transition plan.” ICANN is uniquely positioned, as both the current IANA functions contractor and the global coordinator for the DNS, as the appropriate party to convene the multistakeholder process to develop the transition plan.  NTIA has informed ICANN that it expects that in the development of the proposal, ICANN will work collaboratively with the directly affected parties, including the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), the Internet Architecture Board (IAB), the Internet Society (ISOC), the Regional Internet Registries (RIRs), top level domain name operators, VeriSign, and other interested global stakeholders. NTIA has communicated to ICANN that the transition proposal must have broad community support and address the following four principles: Support and enhance the multi-stakeholder model; Maintain the security, stability, and resiliency of the Internet DNS; Meet the needs and expectation of the global customers and partners of the IANA services; and, Maintain the openness of the Internet. Consistent with the clear policy expressed in bipartisan resolutions of the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives (S.Con.Res.50 and H.Con.Res.127), which affirmed the United States support for the multistakeholder model of Internet governance, NTIA will not accept a proposal that replaces the NTIA role with a government-led or an inter-governmental organization solution.      From the inception of ICANN, the U.S. Government and Internet stakeholders envisioned that the U.S. role in the IANA functions would be temporary.  The Commerce Department’s June 10, 1998 Statement of Policystated that the U.S. Government “is committed to a transition that will allow the private sector to take leadership for DNS management.”  ICANN as an organization has matured and taken steps in recent years to improve its accountability and transparency and its technical competence.  At the same time, international support continues to grow for the multistakeholder model of Internet governance as evidenced by the continued success of the Internet Governance Forum and the resilient stewardship of the various Internet institutions. While stakeholders work through the ICANN-convened process to develop a transition proposal, NTIA’s current role will remain unchanged.  The current IANA functions contract expires September 30, 2015. For further information see: IANA Functions and Related Root Zone Management Transition Questions and Answers About NTIA NTIA is the Executive Branch agency that advises the President on telecommunications and information policy issues. NTIA’s programs and policymaking focus largely on expanding broadband Internet access and adoption in America, expanding the use of spectrum by all users, and ensuring that the Internet remains an engine for continued innovation and economic growth. To find out more about NTIA, visit www.ntia.doc.gov. <Source: NTIA> What this really means … For those of you who do not have a technical background, the DNS (Domain Name Server) system translates an named address such as www.onecitizenspeaking.com into its digital address so that information can be routed correctly over the Internet. Should the root server be compromised, you could assign any name to any address, making it appear that a malignant server in China, Russia, or elsewhere is your local bank. You log-on in your normal fashion, and seconds later, your bank account is drained of your assets. Likewise, should any foreign government wish to compromise the Internet and place their server in the middle of legitimate financial transactions or the transmission of classified information, they could do it surreptitiously and without notice. Yes, there are encryption schemes, but they also depend on algorithms build-in to software and hardware. Bottom line … Nobody in the Obama Administration is saying what brought about this abrupt shift in telecommunications policy. With some suggesting that it was a demand from the special interests who sought the change due to a precipitous drop in sales stemming from a lack of  trust in American hardware, software, and communications infrastructure. With American security credibility at an all-time low with Edward Snowden’s revelations of NSA spying. With others say that the big information oligarch billionaires threatened to withhold campaign funding for the 2014 and 2016 election cycle that are existential threats to progressive socialist democrats in power. While others, claim that this is the precursor to a tax on all Internet services to fund a new governance infrastructure and allowing the government to set, collect, and administer the funds. Like the horrendously bad judgement that allowed the Panama Canal to fall into a hostile government’s hands, we are now handing over the keys to the kingdom to a group that may have alternative motivation to screw America and all netizens. In retrospect, this may turn out to be President Obama’s monumental failure – larger than Obamacare, Benghazi, IRS-gate, and all other scandals combined. We need to remove the progressive socialist democrats from office before they disable the Internet – a key component of America’s critical infrastructure – tantamount to turning America’s nuclear launch codes with the necessary command and control mechanism over to the United Nations.  We are so screwed. -- steve

AMERICA'S POLITICAL SYSTEM IS FALTERING -- CORRUPTION AND POLITICS CRIPPLING THE SYSTEM Posted: 16 Mar 2014 05:54 PM PDT What’s wrong with our government when they refuse to discipline corrupt, incompetent, or inept civil servants? No, I am not even speaking of Lois Learner, a public employee, who would rather cite her Fifth Amendment privilege than explain how the progressive socialist democrats exceeded former President Nixon’s attempts to politicize the Internal Revenue Service and use it to target political enemies. I am speaking about the number of reports of wrongdoing that are released into the media that receive a “ho hum – old news” reception from the media. We know where the system has gone off the rails. In many cases, who was involved. Yet, these very same people are still in places where they can do great damage to our nation. DOJ [Department of Justice] and its components have repeatedly stated publicly that mortgage fraud is a high priority and during this audit we found some examples of DOJ-led efforts that supported those claims. Two such examples are the Criminal Division’s leadership of its mortgage fraud working group and the FBI and USAOs’ participation on more than 90 local task forces and working groups. However, we also determined during this audit that DOJ did not uniformly ensure that mortgage fraud was prioritized at a level commensurate with its public statements. Additionally, we found mortgage fraud to be a low priority, or not listed as a priority, for the FBI Field Offices we visited, including Baltimore, Los Angeles, Miami, and New York. We also found that while the FBI received $196 million in appropriated funding to investigate mortgage fraud activities from fiscal years 2009 through 2011, in FY 2011 the number of FBI agents investigating mortgage fraud as well as the number of pending investigations decreased. We also attempted to review the scope of DOJ’s prosecutorial efforts to address mortgage fraud by reviewing case data. However, we found that the Executive Office for United States Attorneys’ (EOUSA) casemanagement system did not allow for a complete or reliable assessment of DOJ’s mortgage fraud efforts because many Assistant United States Attorneys (AUSA) informed us about underreporting and misclassification of mortgage fraud cases. The Department’s inability to accurately collect data about its mortgage fraud efforts was starkly demonstrated when we sought to review the Distressed Homeowner Initiative. On October 9, 2012, the FFETF held a press conference to publicize the results of the initiative.2 During this press conference, the Attorney General announced that the initiative resulted in 530 criminal defendants being charged, including 172 executives, in 285 criminal indictments or informations filed in federal courts throughout the United States during the previous 12 months. The Attorney General also announced that 110 federal civil cases were filed against over 150 defendants for losses totaling at least $37 million, and involving more than 15,000 victims. According to statements made at the press conference, these cases involved more than 73,000 homeowner victims and total losses estimated at more than $1 billion.  Shortly after this press conference, we requested documentation that supported the statistics presented. In November 2012, in response to our request, DOJ officials informed us that shortly after the press conference concluded they became concerned with the accuracy of the statistics. Based on a review of the case list that was the basis for the figures, the then-Executive Director of the FFETF told us that numerous significant errors and inaccuracies existed with the information.For example, multiple cases were included in the reported statistics that were not distressed homeowner-related fraud. Also, a significant number of the included cases were brought prior to the FY 2012 timeframe. To read the report in full context: Source: DOJ-OIG The reports of wrongdoing are always past tense and years out of date – when it is old news, can be blamed on a prior administration, and nobody wants to punish those who have screwed the pooch. And, then there is the issue of selective enforcement, enforcing the most minor of rules and regulations when the subject is judged to be a political enemy – while allowing politically-connected entities to walk away from massive fraud and abuse of he system. Can anyone explain to me why former New Jersey Mayor Jon Corzine has not been jailed over losing control of approximately $1.5 billion dollars and MF Global’s use of customer funds to carry out speculative investments benefiting the house? I have always found it suspicious that our Congress refuses to put forth easy-to-understand one-page legislative initiates free from obscure references and written in lawyerese. I have also found it suspicious that our government with billions of dollars and access to some of the finest data processing vendors appears to design accounting systems for deception rather than enlightenment. So why am I not surprised when a government agency cooks the books and issues sanitized and misleading media releases? But, even worse, the government refuses to sanction those who are corrupt, inept, incompetent, or are simply political appointees with little or no subject-matter experience. Similar to the appointed ambassadors who have never visited the country of their proposed assignment and whose sum total of knowledge is a quick glance at the country’s Wikipedia entry. These are the people trusted with America’s foreign policy? The Press, protected in the First Amendment as a bulwark against tyranny, appears compromised by a progressive agenda and the continued need to expanding their audience rather than tell the truth … Among the serious news involving the illegal Russian invasion of the Ukraine, the missing Malaysian aircraft, and secession indications from various political entities, we find top billing given to a celebrity announcement that George Michael has given up pot and wants to change his life. Bottom line … We are screwed. Apathetic Americans may have only a few election cycles to begin repairing and restoring America’s constitutional system.  -- steve Related articles Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac -- Wall Street Wizards Planning to Screw Citizens, Investors AGAIN? Government Culture of Corruption: Another Red Flag -- Use of Private Attorney Firms to Conduct Investigations Inspector General Slams the FBI and Department of Justice for Weak Prosecution of Mortgage Fraud Report: DoJ & FBI Don't Care About Mortgage Fraud Mortgage delinquency falls 11.6 percent in March Running out the clock on mortgage fraud UPDATE 1-Watchdog faults FBI for making mortgage fraud a low priority DealBook: U.S. Says One Thing, Does Another on Mortgage Fraud, Watchdog Says

CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT 5 -- TOO MUCH EQUALITY OF OPPORTUNITY, NOT ENOUGH EQUALITY OF OUTCOME Posted: 14 Mar 2014 11:23 PM PDT OMG … The racist progressive socialist democrats suddenly took a look around the state institutions of higher learning and found that Asians with entrepreneurial and professional  aspirations were not majoring in those feminist and cultural programs that produce unemployed progressive socialist democrats – and where is the equality in that? Could the progressive socialist democrats be Asia-phobes? But, don’t get those progressive socialist democrats wrong, they aren’t suggesting reinstating quotas, are they? Of course not, unless you specifically say it’s a quota and count noses, it can’t be a quota. If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck – then it must be a duck or a progressive socialist democrat pseudo-duck … [my comments in blue italic] California Affirmative Action: Campus Diversity Suffers Under Race-Blind Policies Fifteen years ago, California voters were asked: Should colleges consider a student's race when they decide who gets in and who doesn't? With an emphatic "no," they made California the first state to ban the use of race and ethnicity in public university admissions, as well as hiring and contracting. Since then, California's most selective public colleges and graduate schools have struggled to assemble student bodies that reflect the state's demographic mix. [Unfortunately, the progressive socialist democrats do not believe in exceptionalism nor do they believe in a world where a target population, be it a school or the Supreme Court, does not mirror the percentage population of minorities found across the nation. In essence, promoting the socialist equality of outcomes over the capitalist equality of opportunity. Since a nation’s resources are finite, that means the progressive socialist democrats believe in managing real or imagined scarcity downward so that everyone is equally dumb and miserable rather than smart and happy.] Universities around the country could soon face the same challenge. The U.S. Supreme Court is set to revisit the thorny issue of affirmative action less than a decade after it endorsed the use of race as a factor in college admissions. [No matter how you define it, affirmative action is another name for quota-based reverse discrimination.  The effects of California's ban, known as Proposition 209, are particularly evident at the world-renowned University of California, Berkeley campus, where the student body is highly diverse but hardly resembles the ethnic and racial fabric of the state. With affirmative action outlawed, Asian American students have dominated admissions. The freshman class admitted to UC Berkeley this coming fall is 30 percent white and 46 percent Asian, according to newly released data. The share of admitted Asians is four times higher than their percentage in the state's K-12 public schools. But traditionally underrepresented Hispanic and black students remain so. In a state where Latinos make up half the K-12 public school population, only 15 percent of the Berkeley students are Hispanic. And the freshman class is less than 4 percent African Americans, although they make up 7 percent of the K-12 students. [This is awful. The Asian culture – ‘a zero-defect culture’ that prizes education and achievement – is producing more qualified students than say the Mexican culture – ‘a good enough culture’ that does not prize education and achievement.] Junior Magali Flores, 20, said she experienced culture shock when she arrived on the Berkeley campus in 2009 after graduating from a predominantly Latino high school in Los Angeles. Flores, one of five children of working-class parents from Mexico, said she feels the university can feel hostile to students of color, causing some to leave because they don't feel welcome at Berkeley. "We want to see more of our people on campus," Flores said. "With diversity, more people would be tolerant and understanding of different ethnicities, different cultures." [Something is wrong with Flores’ account of culture shock. Berkeley is one of the most progressive socialist democrat bastions in the University of California system. A hotbed of radical racial, ethnic, and gender advocacy. Perhaps, Flores did not feel as welcome as she does among her own people – some of which have turned areas of Southern California into the impoverished, undereducated, unemployed, and crime-ridden hell-holes they left behind. When people speak of tolerance and understanding of different cultures, they are often speaking about securing special affirmative action advantages which does not require strict adherence to strict admission requirements or academic norms. But, then again, one only needs to turn to academia.edu to find that Flores is an activist with a biased opinion that needs to be discounted … With that educational background, one cannot imagine gainful employment other than in education, government, foundations, or some other endeavor that requires activist credentials – perhaps as a unionized community organizer? Of course, there is always law school as a force multiplier for activist activities. Considering that affirmative action gave a boost to President Obama, Justice Sotomayor, and Senator Elizabeth 'Tonto' Warren as they went to prestigeous law schools.] UC Berkeley has tried to bolster diversity by expanding outreach to high schools in poor neighborhoods and considering applicants' achievements in light of the academic opportunities available to them. But officials say it's hard to find large numbers of underrepresented minorities competitive enough for Berkeley, where only about one in five applicants are offered spots in the freshman class. In addition, California's highest-achieving minority students are heavily recruited by top private colleges that practice affirmative action and offer scholarships to minorities, administrators say. "It's frustrating," said Harry Le Grande, vice chancellor of student affairs at Berkeley. "Many times we lose them to elite privates that can actually take race into account when they admit students." [It is almost impossible to promote underachieving minorities in the hard sciences since physics, chemistry, biology, and mathematics do not have racial, ethnic, or gender fudge factors that would allow a minority to compete with any high-achieving student. So, like recruiting elite athletes with scholarships and other perks, why should we be surprised that some elite educational institutions are recruiting the high-achieving students, and leaving the dregs for lesser institutions? It is the way of the world in a capitalist society that fosters and features exceptionalism and a meritocracy.] Backers say affirmative-action policies are needed to combat the legacy of racial discrimination and level the playing field for minorities who are more likely to attend inferior high schools. Colleges benefit from diverse student bodies, and minority students often become leaders in their communities after graduating from top colleges. [Ah ha! The progressive socialist democrats and their special interest union buddies have destroyed the modern educational system. They have polluted a fact-based education by concentrating on factors other than achievement. They have dumbed-down tests so that parents do not revolt and abandon the progressive socialist democrat party in droves. They have made education more about funding large progressive socialist democrat pension funds than about the children. The worst inner cities are mostly under progressive socialist democrat control, where funds are siphoned-off by politically-connected special interests before they even reach the classroom. Where classroom discipline is almost non-existent and hooliganism is tolerated while making a fake gun sign with your fingers gets you expelled. Kabuki Theatre to distract from the fact that progressive socialist democrat educators have screwed the pooch and have produced a system where minorities must be given affirmative action programs to avoid the reality of another generation of functional illiterates. Let us not forget that it was the progressive socialist democrats who were behind the single-parent, multiple-child, multiple-father families as a cultural by-products. Where the children having children are fast-tracked into poverty and government entitlements rather than elite schools like the Little Red Schoolhouse otherwise known as Bezerkeley.] "It's critical that our most selective institutions that look at least somewhat like the rest of our society," Nassirian said. [This is pure bullshit. Our most selective institutions do not need to look like the rest of our society. They need to look like an elite group of super-achievers if our exceptional American nature is to continue at the forefront of societal leadership. Yes, we are exceptional. And Barack Obama, and the United Nations, be damned if they think we should become just another unexceptional member nation of the United Nations. An industrialized nation plundered to fund the underdeveloped countries.] <snip> Despite consistent opposition, California's ban has remained enshrined in law. Earlier this month, U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld Proposition 209 for the second time. The three-judge panel rejected a legal challenge in which Gov. Jerry Brown joined minority students in arguing the law is unconstitutional. [I submit to you that Governor Jerry Brown is nothing more than a prototypical progressive socialist democrat pandering to the minorities needed to create a coalition of the disaffected so they can gain or maintain political power to perpetuate the radical socialist democrat party in California and elsewhere. Apparently, Jerry Brown does not understand the California State Constitution or the United States Constitution when it promotes equality under the law.] Affirmative-action advocates say Proposition 209 has created a "new Jim Crow regime" in California, where elite public colleges are dominated by white and Asian students while black and Hispanic students are relegated to less prestigious campuses. [Now for the labels: Jim Crow, racist, bigot, hater, denier, ‘phobe or other designation that the progressive socialist democrats use to bow their detractors into compliance or silence. Perhaps, Brown should rail against the heavens to intercede and turn the good-enough culture of the Blacks and Hispanics into the zero-defect culture of the Whites and Asians.] "It is extraordinary that the vast majority of high school graduates in this state are minorities, and they're denied the opportunities to go to their state universities," said attorney Shanta Driver for the group By Any Means Necessary, which filed suit to overturn the ban. [Wow! The display of the core truth of the progressive socialist democrats – where the means, fair or foul, justify the ends. Hence, “By Any Means Necessary.” If the majority of high school graduates are minorities and are denied the opportunities to go to OUR state universities … perhaps the problem is with the student, the educational system, home-life, or cultural environment. An environment that sees mainstreamed and very proficient Black students ridiculed and suppressed by their peers as selling out and becoming Uncle Toms and Aunt Jemimas. Where high achievers dress normally and speak in clear, standard English.] UC officials have tried to increase campus diversity by admitting the top 9 percent of graduates from each high school, conducting a "holistic review" of applications that decreases the weight of standardized test scores and eliminating the requirement to take SAT subject exams. [Good or bad, the SAT was a standardized test. But we cannot have any test that highlights the failure of the unionized educational system under the progressive socialist democrats. We cannot even test teachers for subject matter knowledge or teaching ability. And, giving teachers tenure after a few years is tantamount to institutionalizing the mediocrity found in unions that promote by seniority rather than merit.] Source: California Affirmative Action: Campus Diversity Suffers Under Race-Blind Policies.  .  The corrupt progressive socialist democrats will stop at nothing to achieve their nefarious ends … SENATE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT 5 – REPEAL PROPOSITION 209 PROVISIONS Democrats in the California Senate used their two-thirds supermajority Thursday to pass a measure that would ask voters if they want to repeal the state's ban on race- and gender-based preferences in government hiring and contracting and university admissions. With the bare minimum number of votes needed - 27 - the upper house passed and sent to the Assembly Senate Constitutional Amendment 5, which would ask voters if they want to repeal provisions that became law 18 years ago with the passage of Proposition 209. Read more at: Senate passes measure asking voters to repeal Prop. 209 What the Amendment 5 says … SUBJECT …    Public education: student recruitment and selection DESCRIPTION … Existing law declares the Legislature's intent that, in developing undergraduate and graduate admissions criteria, the governing boards of the University of California (UC) and the California State University (CSU) develop processes that strive to be fair and easily understandable, and consult broadly with California's diverse ethnic and cultural communities. Existing lawdeclares the intent of the Legislature that the UC and the CSU seek to enroll a student body that meets high academic standards and reflects the cultural, racial, geographic, economic, and social diversity of California. This constitutional amendmentproposes to place before the voters an amendment to the California Constitution that: Deletes the specific provisions implemented through the enactment of Proposition 209 that prohibit the State from granting preferential treatment to individuals or groups on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin, in the operation of public education. Deletes the University of California (UC) and the public school system from the definition of the "State" under Section 31 of Article 1, thereby repealing the application of the provisions of Proposition 209 to those entities. Makes a number of nonsubstantive technical changes. Source: Bill Analysis – State Committee on Elections and Constitutional Amendments Bottom line … The progressive socialist democrats and their special interest unions have destroyed education and turned exceptionalism into socialism. A clear and present danger to the welfare of America and all Americans. We do not progress by restricting the best and brightest in order to move the worst and dumbest a faction of a notch higher in a delusional world. We need to throw these progressive socialist democrats out of office before the State of California, and America, reaches the tipping point where we become a cross-bred nation between the politics of France and the achievements of Mexico. Call me any name you want, but try to prove me wrong? Show me the real reason for progressive socialist democrats attempting to destroy charter schools in underprivileged areas? Explain to me why the discipline of the Catholic and Christian schools produces more high-achievement students? Show me why school uniforms rather than gang-wear and cultural dress should not be demanded to eliminate hooliganism?