Wednesday, March 25, 2009

Obama's Youth Brigades

As you may know, Jones had another one of his signature tantrum/breakdowns during Tuesday's broadcast (available on YouTube; the breakdown begins in the last 2 minutes or so of Part II). He had the presence of mind to know that he was freaking out, because he screamed at the people who will be making fun of him for freaking out. I'm not making fun of his fury. Frankly, I'm growing bored with his tantrums; every rant is like being on a plane with a teething baby for hours.

Jones was/is enraged by H.R. 1388, the GIVE Act, as are most rightist commentators. See, for example, Michelle Malkin's take. I'm no fan of Malkin, but I have to admit she's reached a few relatively sensible conclusions about the act. Alex Jones could benefit by paying attention to her this time, instead of screaming at her like a deranged street preacher.

Jones has been raging against "Obama's Youth Brigades" and "Obama's Hitler Youth" since before the election, knowing that Obama planned all along to juice up AmeriCorps, the Peace Corps, and other service orgs.

I don't particularly like some aspects of the GIVE Act (see notes at the end of this post), but as usual Jones takes a molehill and turns it into the freaking Matterhorn. He claims the whole thing is patterned after the East German Stasi, calling it the "slavery act" and the "worst, most virulent strain of tyranny" the U.S. has ever witnessed. He actually urged listeners who were in their cars to stop other motorists and tell them to tune in to the show.

I'm not going to dissect the entire GIVE Act. You can do that for yourself by reading it here. For now, I'm just going to cover two of the major misconceptions about the act that are being trumpeted by Jones, World Net Daily, Michael Savage, Lew Rockwell, Red White & Green, and many others:

  • GIVE would institute mandatory volunteerism. I found nothing in the act that would have required anyone to volunteer. It basically increases funding and other resources for service orgs, and creates incentives for volunteerism (particularly among minorities, at-risk youth, students, seniors, and veterans). But in H.R. 1388 there was a provision that suggested examining "whether a workable, fair, and reasonable mandatory service requirement for all able young people could be developed, and how such a requirement could be implemented in a manner that would strengthen the social fabric of the Nation..." Frankly, I don't see any way this could be workable. But it's a totally moot point: When the Senate passed the act, the mandatory service provision was removed. Jones didn't know this when he began his tantrum.
  • GIVE would outlaw protests. No. And the people who are disseminating this bit of misinfo never seem to reference the relevant part of the act correctly. They've called it "Article 12", "Ammendment 40", and several other things, but it's actually Section 1304: "Prohibited Activities and Ineligible Organizations", an ammended version of Section 125. Though the wording is a little muddy, it's clear (to me, at least) that this section deals with activities that you would not be allowed to engage in while actively representing a service org, if that org is to remain eligible for funding. It DOES NOT make the activities illegal, and it DOES NOT prohibit anyone from engaging in them during their own free time, when they're not "on the job". You will NOT be barred from attending church for the duration of your time as a volunteer, as some people have claimed; that's ludicrous. Of course you can attend church. But can you try to pass off church activity as volunteerism in order to obtain government funding? No, you cannot. Can you organize a pride parade and pretend it's charity work so you can reap the benefits? No, you cannot. That's about all that Sections 125/1304 are trying to say.

Ich bin ein paranoid.

Believe it or not, the strangest part of Tuesday's broadcast had nothing to do with GIVE. It came when Jones got pissed off with his father for refusing to go on air and corroborate his theory that Obama is the AntiChrist. Seriously. "Yeah, fine, whatever," he snapped when his producer said the senior Jones declined to go on air.

The elder Jones, an orthopedic surgeon, recently pointed out to Jones that Obama gave his Berlin speech from the Pergamon [Altar] steps , and showed him a passage in the Book of Revelations that prophesies the AntiChrist will give his speeches from the Pergamon steps. It's all explained in the Wikipedia entry.

Other weirdness from recent broadcasts:

- March 20th

  • Jones broke the MIAC report story. Rush Limbaugh et. al. got it from him and didn't give him credit.
  • Jones has said numerous times that he's the leader of the 9/11 Truth movement, a statement many Truthers find false and offensive. But on his March 20th broadcast, he excoriated listeners for refusing to believe he founded the Truth movement. Wow.
  • The Pope works for the Rothschilds and Rockefellers.

- March 24th

  • Gardens are being outlawed.
  • Cold Spring Harbor scientists have admitted to drawing blood from all babies at birth and using it to develop race-specific bioweapons. I already know that Jones' idea of "admitted" and mine can differ dramatically.
  • "You're looking at the next Adolf Hitler [Obama]."
  • "They're building death camps."
  • "This [the GIVE Act] doesn't have to happen. If people got off their big, fat asses..." (Pot, meet kettle.)
  • "AAAAAAAAAGGGHHHHHH!"
  • Announces the release of another Obama film on July 4th. Keep in mind that he didn't make any full-length documentaries about Bush. Urges people to buy the high-quality version of The Obama Deception. Talks about it length later in the broadcast, ticking off the number of views it has had on various video sharing sites, and again almost begs people to buy it.
  • They're trying to ban documentaries that are critical of the current administration. As usual, the real story is far more complex.

Now that we've covered the Hitler/AntiChrist/Stasi bulls**, let's look at some real reasons why GIVE might not be a good idea:


1. Can the States really afford this right now? Didn't Obama say he wants to see the deficit decrease?

2. Who gets to decide which service orgs are ineligible?

Can't think of anything else at the moment. I heartily support volunteerism, and I hope that increased opportunities for service offered by GIVE will help create stronger social networks, healthier communities, and more civic-minded citizens.

2 comments:

Mikister said...

I wonder if the new Obama film will simply be exactly what Loose Change: Second Edition was.

SME said...

Gawd, if that's the case we'll never see the end of it. We'll have The Obama Deception XII: We're Probably Gonna Have To Do This Again.

*shudder*

About Me

My photo
I'm a 30ish housefrau living in Canada

Followers