The Ever Increasing Police State. How Far To The Nazi Twilight Zone?

[Xicano]

:puke:

Parents of five-year-olds starting school have been sent an 83-point questionnaire that probes personal details of their lives.

It asks whether their children tell lies or bully others, and if they steal at home or from shops.

Parents are questioned over whether they have friends, if they can speak freely with others in their family and how well they did at school themselves.

The form also delves into family routines, questioning whether they eat takeaways and if the children drink water with their meals.

The information will be held indefinitely on NHS databases for the use of health workers. Planners want new forms submitted each year to build up a detailed picture of the family and their children's development.

-snip-

There is no legal compulsion to fill in the School Entry Wellbeing Review forms, but parents who do not are likely to be visited by community nurses charged with identifying vulnerable families.

Dylan Sharpe of the Big Brother Watch pressure group said: 'This is incredibly intrusive and asks questions which, quite frankly, Lincolnshire Community Health Services do not need to know and have no right knowing.

'Even worse, the NHS Trust has failed to make it clear that this is a voluntary questionnaire. I would advise any parent receiving this to stick it straight in the bin.'



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1228716/Big-Brother-quiz-new-school-parents-Officials-launch-83-point-probe-families-lives.html

[Hubert Flottz]

1. 'Hitler's Brain Is Still Alive'

That movie was right.

Edit...just a matter of time before the government starts measuring people's heads.

[Echo In Light]

2. _

[The Straight Story]

3. Some people love nanny states (The UK starts a trend, the US will follow)

But don't dare call em on it lest you be called a libertarian (ie, if you think there is too much government you don't want any government in things, or so they say....).

The UK jumped the shark a long time ago.

[Fumesucker]

5. Funny, the UK has an incarceration rate only a fraction of that in the US..

I think incarceration rates are a fairly good measure of the power of government in people's lives and government here is far more powerful by that particular metric.

[The Straight Story]

6. UK is second, Nigeria is down further on the list. Not sure the point...

INCARCERATION RATES
US: 726 people per 100,000
UK: 142
China: 118
France: 91
Japan: 58
Nigeria: 31

[Fumesucker]

8. Like I said, the incarceration rate in the UK is a fraction that in the US..

142/726 <= 1/5

If you don't see the relationship between incarceration and government coercion of the populace then there's not much hope for you, IMO.

[The Straight Story]

10. So you think china is a more free country than the us?

There are many causes for a higher rate of incarceration, and some laws are more of a civil than a criminal nature.

[Fumesucker]

13. Apparently in some ways China is more free..

It would be logical for an American to fear incarceration more than a Chinese, the American has a far higher likelihood of being incarcerated than does the Chinese.

You mistake having a lot of stuff for freedom.

[paulsby]

16. you make a mistake too

incarceration rates are also going to be lower, in countries like china, where the punishments are draconian, and./or the culture is less individualistic and more conformist (japan comes to mind in the latter case). there are countries where you can have your hand chopped off for first offense stealing, and they have lower incarceration rates than us. are they more free? you can't drink alcohol, you don't have anything close to free speech, if you are a woman you have even less freedom, you can't walk down the street with a male who is not related to you, etc. incarceration rates are A metric. anybody who claims that "in some ways china is more free" doesn't have a grasp on what freedom means.

[Fumesucker]

18. And someone who lives in the country with the highest incarceration rate in the world

And bleats of "freedom" doesn't have a grasp of what it really means either.

Let's put it this way, of the western "democracies" the US is arguably the least free.

[paulsby]

20. let me put it this way

we have more speech freedom than most of the western democracies, in regards to speech, with their hate speech laws, etc. we have the freedom to keep and bear arms. we have more freedom than most when it comes to criminal defendant rights. it depends on what freedoms you consider more important. after seeing cases like the bardot case in france, for example, i would never cede that kind of power to the govt. to regulate what i say. in regards to drug use, we generally have less freedom than many other (but not all) western nations. canada, for instance, is much less free in terms of food supplements, but freer in regards to heroin and mj. i find it ironic that many legal supplements in the US are routinely confiscated by canadian customs. i've spent a LOT of time in other countries (mostly central america), but also europe. so, i have quite a good idea of comparable freedoms. in england, i can't walk 10 feet in london w/o being under govt. surveillance, and i have far less freedom of speech. i also don't have as many rights if i am a criminal suspect. in england, if you choose to remain silent it CAN be used against you, for instance. they also don't have an exclusionary rule that triggers automatically, like ours does. in france, the legal system is not adversarial, and the judge acts in both a judge and prosecutor role. i prefer our freedoms, thanks, although we need more (e.g. legalization of mj, decrim'ing the war on drugs, etc.)

[Fumesucker]

22. If we have so many rights here in the "land of the free" then why so many locked up?

I'm sorry, it does not compute.

If the laws of other countries in the west are so much more restrictive than our own then their incarceration rates should be higher than our own, either that or Americans are uniquely criminally minded.

I think it has to do with the fact that we have all these "freedoms" in theory but the practice is far more restrictive an onerous.

[paulsby]

24. i'm sorry you do not compute

like i said, incarceration rate is A metric. for pete's sake, saudi arabia has a lower incarceration rate than we do. are they more free? i presented NUMEROUS examples of differences in freedoms. you presented none except, the incarceration rate. nobody is arguing the incarceration rate. yes, we have a higher one. yes, that is not a good thing. i don't think anybody is going to disagree with that.

[Fumesucker]

28. Explain why the incarceration rate in the UK is so low then.

If the population is being watched more stringently than in the US, they have more restrictive laws than the US and they have far fewer rights than those of us in the US then logically they should have many more people locked up.

Either that or Americans are far and away more likely to commit crimes than Britons.

[paulsby]

32. except thats not a logical inference

your argument begs the question and is not valid. fwiw, england values what they refer to as "community punishments" more than we do. that's one difference. also, studies have shown that DESPITE the far greater surveillance in england, criminals have ADAPTED to that surveillance, know where the cameras are, etc. it's kind of like if you get a club for your car, that won't deter auto theft, in general, the thieves will just move on to an easier target. it's good for you, but it doesn't change the crime rate. let's look at another stat, northern ireland of all places has an incarceration rate roughly ONE HALF that of england and wales. do you think people are freer in northern ireland (especially in areas where the military patrols the street along with heavily armed police, and you have to go through intrusive security checkpoints numerous times when moving about the city. furthermore, recent studies exist that show that england only incarcerates 12 people per 1000 recorded crimes. that's a staggeringly low metric.the #'s are 48 in spain, and 33 in ireland, both of which still have a much lower incarceration rate. in england, one in 22 robberies results in a jail sentence. one in 22! in 1954, the rate was one in three! it's kind of sad that somebody on a board like this, where people are theoretically not as prone to kneejerking on criminal justice issues, hasn't looked at this issue broadly before coming to a conclusion about freedom

[Fumesucker]

38. As I said, I've spent time there .. I don't feel any less free than I do here..

More so in some ways.. At least I won't have to become a bankrupt pauper if I get a serious illness. I'm definitely more free there to change my job at will or strike out on my own as an entrepreneur. In fact the US has one of the lowest class mobility ratings of the western world.

I just enjoy yanking the chain of those who like to say the UK has turned into some sort of Orwellian state and ignore our own faults.

[joeglow3]

40. Ahhhh. Anecdotal evidence.

I have never witnessed racism, so it does not exist in the US.

[Fumesucker]

49. The "evidence" is clear..

There are far more people locked in cages in "for profit" prison in the US under the complete control of sadists than there are in the UK.

In fact I don't believe they even have "for profit" prisons in the UK, the very concept should make anyone who truly loves freedom puke.

It does that to me.

[paulsby]

41. how you FEEL is irrelevant

i am talkng facts, constitutional law, etc. feelings are irrelevant. i could FEEL freer in mexico, but if and when i had a run in with the federales, that feeling would change pretty quickly

[Fumesucker]

46. The "facts" are that far more people are punished far more severely in the US than in the UK

You somehow manage to equate that with "freedom".

And I note that you didn't respond to the *fact* that I would be more free in the UK to change my job at will or indeed become an entrepreneur without having to worry about whether I could afford to get sick than in the USA.

You think insurance slaves are "free"?

And that's basically what you are if you can't change your job without losing insurance that could well mean the difference between life and death.

[paulsby]

50. and the facts are

that i already acknowledged that. i merely said that is not the sole (or the best) measure of freedom, and provided several other examples. in other words, it's not an open and shut case like you think it is. personally, i am very glad to have (for example) greater freedom of speech and greater RKBA than the european standard, and greater protections against incrimination and much greater privacy rights than the UK law allows, etc. it doesn't mean i think our incarceration rate is a good thing. imo, nonviolent drug offenders should rarely, if ever serve time. in some ways we are less free, in other ways we are more free. you choose to only consider ONE metric. that's where your logical error lies. and by that metric, countries like saudi arabia are freer than countries like the UK. see the fallacy?

[Fumesucker]

53. There shouldn't *be* "nonviolent drug offenders" in the first place..

If there is no victim there is no crime.

And opinions are just like noses, most everybody has one.

You really want to justify the insane level of incarceration that we have in this country, I don't and can't honestly think of a better metric to show the true level of freedom in a country than the number of people being punished and the severity of punishment that is meted out to them.

Private, for profit prisons. I wonder how many other western democracies have those?

"No knock raids" more common in the US or the UK, per capita?

If fifty percent plus one of the population had the rest incarcerated, would that "not be a good metric" of freedom?

At what point does locking people in cages become a decent metric of freedom?

[paulsby]

56. we are generally in accord there

i'm against the war on drugs. i already gave you numerous statistics as counterexamples to your false statements and you just ignore them and go fuming on in your classic example of american exceptionalism. like i said, american exceptionalism is fine here amongst the fact challenged, as long as it is america being compared NEGATIVELY to other locations. thanks for yet again demonstrating my point, and doing it without acknowledgment of simple facts.

[joeglow3]

25. Do people research shit before forming opinions any more?

Per the New York Times:

"People who commit nonviolent crimes in the rest of the world are less likely to receive prison time and certainly less likely to receive long sentences."

"Efforts to combat illegal drugs play a major role in explaining long prison sentences in the United States as well."

"Still, it is the length of sentences that truly distinguishes American prison policy. Indeed, the mere number of sentences imposed here would not place the United States at the top of the incarceration lists. If lists were compiled based on annual admissions to prison per capita, several European countries would outpace the United States. But American prison stays are much longer, so the total incarceration rate is higher."

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/23/us/23prison.html?pagewanted=2&ei=5124&en=1e89b55c17e3f631&ex=1366689600&partner=newsvine&exprod=newsvine

[Fumesucker]

30. So what?

If the punishments are so harsh in the US then people will commit fewer crimes, that is the rationalization.

You think being more likely to receive a long prison term for a non violent crime means you are more free than someone far less likely to receive such a punishment?

:wtf:

[joeglow3]

39. OMFG are you dense?

You will be punished for the EXACT SAME THING in both England and the US. However, there are multiple examples above regarding individual freedoms we enjoy in the US that many Western nations do not.

Using your logic, If England had a list of 1,000 illegal activities and punished you for all of them (but with no prison terms), but the US had only 1 illegal activity (say, murder) and sentenced you to life in prison, the US would be less free.

This really is not a hard issue to grasp. However, you have to look at much more than ONE FRIGGING NUMBER before forming an opinion.

[paulsby]

42. also note that

given the same offense, you are less likely to be incarcerated for it in england, than in the US. england for example incarcerates one in 22 for robbery. that is much lower than other european nations. despite the fact that england has a much higher incarceration rate than most of europe, there are only 12 people incarcerated for every 1000 crimes compared to 48 in spain and 33 in ireland.

[Fumesucker]

45. It's more than one number..

It's the number of human beings being put in cages under the complete control of sadists..

The Stanford Prison Experiment showed that randomly selected college students showed "genuine sadistic tendencies" within two weeks of becoming "guards".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_prison_experiment

I ask again, you think that being severely punished for the very same crime that someone else would only be mildly punished for shows that you are "more free" than they are?

[joeglow3]

57. Given that they are crimes in both countries...

...I see my freedoms limited equally by each. While I think this should be considered, it appears you are putting no thought into items that exist in one country, but not the other (i.e. all those listed above).

[paulsby]

34. very true

for example, england jails ONE IN 22 for robbery, whereas in 1954 it was ONE IN THREE. burglaries? ONE IN FIFTY FOUR. of course, the US is more incarceration happy than england. NOBODY who has looked at stats denies that.

[paulsby]

15. not really

there are other metrics. when you have to watch what you say (UK has criminalized all sorts of speech that is legal in the US), can't carry a gun (or a knife in most cases), and are under the eyes of govt. surveillance practically every step you take in many cities, that's a lot of govt. power. incarcertaion is A metric, but not the only metric.

[Fumesucker]

21. I have family in the UK, a considerable number actually..

There isn't a single one of them that has even considered coming to live in the US. Some of them are wealthy enough to have villas in Spain and live in what amounts to a mansion.

No, the UK is not a perfect society, but we are a damn long way from being a perfect society also, I've spent a considerable amount of time with my family in the UK over the years and have never felt less free there than here.

At least in the UK, if I put a Darwin Fish on my car it's unlikely to get vandalized, greatly unlike my experience here in fundie hell. That experience taught me a valuable lesson, you are only free as long as you don't rock the boat and do something of which the majority disapproves.

And arguably you are under government surveillance about as much here in the US as you are in the UK, perhaps more so in some ways.

[paulsby]

23. and

i know lots of people, myself included who would never consider living in the UK. it's nice to visit, though. that's nice. as for your strawman, i never said the US was a "perfect society". spare me the strawmen. your argument about surveillance is patently false. but then you are apparently not interested in facts. also, note that criminal defendants generally have fewer and less expansive rights in the UK - if one chooses to remain silent, that can be used against you, and they don't have an automatically triggered exclusionary rule like we do.

[Fumesucker]

26. In what way is my argument about surveillance patently false?

Eh, we have police helicopters that fly over my area looking for pot plants, they'll hover for long periods of time minutely inspecting your property whether or not you have anything illicit growing there.

Never heard of such a thing in the UK, yes they have drug laws but they are by no means as draconian as our own.

If the UK was so much more advanced a surveillance state than the the US and the laws about criminal prosecutions so much less stringent then they would have a higher incarceration rate than the US. That is clearly not the case.

[paulsby]

29. which part

the part that says the US is as much of a surveillance society as the UK. that's absurd. do you have any idea how much video surveillance control the london metropolitan police has? i've worked hundreds of investigations and i can count on one hand the # of cases where we had any govt. surveillance footage available. london has vast areas of the city where coverage is extensive (pretty much every intersection, etc). it comes down to this. if you are walking around a major UK city (and some minor cities), you are almost constantly being recorded, and many of those cameras are govt. owned. that is simply not the case in the US. and in some US states, helicopter surveillance is strictly limited, as compared to the federal standard. my state comes to mind, since our constitution has a right to privacy in it. again, you use the false metric of incarceration rate as a proxy for surveillance. if you actually doubt the UK has less surveillance than the US, then you are woefully ignorant. if you want cites, ask. you are clearly ignorant on this topic.

[Fumesucker]

31. I've spent considerable time in the UK, have you?

And the vaunted surveillance cameras are turning out to be remarkably unhelpful in solving crimes so I hear.

[paulsby]

35. that's very true

and totally tangential to the fact that if you, especially as an innocent citizen, not somebody targeted for surveillance based on reasoanble suspicion of a crime, are far more likely to be surveilled by govt. in england than in the US, than you are less free in that regard. that is totally unrelated to the efficacy of this surveillance in apprehending criminals. part of the reason is that criminals ADAPT to surveillance cameras. another reason for the lower incarceration rate is that england, despite having a higher crime rate, incarcerates less people for similar offenses than the US,and less than they did several decades ago. for example, they incarcerate one in 22 for robbery, as opposed to one in 3 in 1954

[cali]

4. It's the Daily Mail, which is right wing shit, er, sheet.

[The Doctor.]

7. I was just thinking... 'Well, if I wanted to know a number of early factors

that might shape an entire generation, I'd just do a global survey for kids of a certain age."

Naturally people think 'gestapo' when there's a survey involved. :eyes:

[Orsino]

27. You don't understand. Voluntary surveys are just the first step.

If unchecked, this could lead to visits by officials offering to help with any problems voluntarily revealed.

Or censuses. Goddammit, we must stop this now, before one more person gets help.

[paulsby]

37. if US govt agents went door to door

asking for voluntary DNA samples, would that be ok with people? just because something is voluntary, doesn't mean it's not oppressive if govt. does it. fwiw, our nation has relatively strict laws in regards to the ability of LEO's and their agencies in collecting and storing what is referred to as "non-criminal" intelligence. many other, if not most other, have looser restrictions on that. i haven't been able to get hold of information as to what restrictions in this regard apply to interpol. if anybody knows, i'd love to know

[Odin2005]

9. Daily Hate Mail RW hysteria.

The Daily Mail is the UK equivalent of the Moonie Times.

Note that is is voluntary.

[paulsby]

17. and?...

voluntariness is NICE, but i can think of all sorts of things the govt. could do voluntarily that would be oppressive. they could go door and door and ask people to VOLUNTEER to give DNA samples for a national database... "it;'s for the children". would that be ok? it's voluntary. and of course, they wouldn't get suspicious of people who exercised their rights and declined. nope, i can't imagine govt. agents doing that (i say AS a govt. agent). police in some places in japan, for instance, go door to door in neighborhoods, introduce themselves to the residents and ask them all sorts of intrusive questions (are you married, where do you work, what are your work areas, what do you do for recreation) and this is accepted in that culture. voluntary or not, that would not fly in the US

[Octafish]

11. Nothing to worry about.

It's not like NAZI Germany, which...

stole elections to gain power.
invaded countries with which were no threat.
spied on its own citizens without warrants.
used economic policy to enrich cronies.
tortured children to elicit confessions from parents.
killed without trial its own citizens.
maintained a constant state of emergency.

So, no, England, unlike the USA, is nothing like NAZI Germany.

[BeFree]

12. Heh

Sad, but true.
We're number 1!!
A little, you might say, too close for comfort.

[Echo In Light]

36. And that's the exact perspective that Americans seek to avoid like the plague

.. you know, in the name of Optimism!

[paulsby]

43. rubbish on several fronts

privacy interests, for example, are less protected in england than the US. you do not NEED a warrant in many cases in england in order to "spy" on citizens. police in england have broader search and seizure powers. look athis legislation in parliament right now! http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200809/ldbills/048/en/09048x-d.htm look at clause 53, section 290. no warrant required even for a search of a private premises. note also that the standard of evidence is lower. officers in the UK can search premises and persons under "reasonable suspicion". in the US, reasonable suspicion will allow a pat frisk, only if there is also reasonable grounds to suspect a weapon, and ONLY a pat frisk, not a search. and definitely not a search of a premises.

[Fumesucker]

47. So, how many "no knock" raids in the UK versus the US?

Proportional to population of course..

[paulsby]

51. i have no idea

nor i suggest do you. are no knock warrants overused? imo, yes. how common are they? the vast majority of warrants are NOT no knock warrants. heck, i've been on ovre 100 warrant services and only recall 2 that were no knock. you can pick any # of metrics. like i said, the UK doesn't have a blanket exclusionary rule. that means evidence seized CONTRARY to case law and established procedure CAN be admitted. in the US, items seized contrary to case law/constitution are automatically suppressed with a few exceptions (inevitable discovery doctrine, etc.). in the UK, if you are arrested, you have NO right to remain silent. it can be used against you. in france, the judge serves a dual role and is not the impartial arbiter between two sides. in the UK, warrants are much more rarely required than the US, especially for private premises. etc. etc. etc.

[Octafish]

58. My point was that the United States now resembles NAZI Germany.

Here's more on the subject:

Know your BFEE: Like a NAZI

Here's how things got this way:

A fact curiously missing from American history and any mention of the Warren Commission

Know your BFEE: Nazis couldn’t win WWII, so they backed Bushes.

Know your BFEE: Spawn of Wall Street and the Third Reich

Know your BFEE: Money Trumps Peace. Always.

Almost forgot: Where the NAZIs got a lot of their evil ideas came from this side of the pond:

Know your BFEE: Eugenics and the NAZIs - The California Connection

BTW: Your example of "rubbish on several fronts" focused on how the authorities in the UK do not need a warrant to spy on citizens or search their person or premises. Thanks to the passage of the USA PATRIOT Act, authorities in the USA no longer need to do that. Sorry about not making it more clear. It didn’t seem necessary. Here's more on that subject:

Frank Church and the Abyss of Warrantless Wiretapping.

[fascisthunter]

44. conservos should be so proud

they whinned about communist Russia, then they pull a 180 and act like a bunch of Nazis to claim their warped nationalistik pride.

[paulsby]

14. and yet, many peopl here support kneejerk overreaching legislation

that helps promote this type of governance, e.g. school "anti-bullying" laws.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

48. Aren't the objections to anti-bullying laws...

based on homosexual students being protected from bullying?

Do you have another?

[paulsby]

52. of course

like most kneejerk legislation, it's overbroad and/or redundant and thus suspect. see also, WA state's cyberstalking law, which will never survive constitutional scrutiny. it's effectively unenforceable. assault is against the law. criminal threats are against the law. etc. so what situations does "bullying" as a CRIME cover that isn't already covered by existing law? either it's going to delve into protected speech, or it's already covered. extortion is illegal. robbery is illegal. etc. so what kind of bullying needs to be criminalized? also note that every time you write a new law, you cede power to the govt. the more and the more broad laws that are passed, the more power govt. gets. and govt. RARELY gives power back. and as to federal anti-bullying laws , do we want to give the federal govt power to prosecute some kid in high school for some playground offense? really? again, people will willingly cede power to the govt. "for the children" or whatever cause is flava of the day. it's kneejerk and it's offensive and it's disruptive to liberty. i hate it when the right does it, and it isn't any better when we do it.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

54. Could you be a little more specific?

And a little less kneejerky?

[paulsby]

55. i was

and i asked a specific question. what behavior needs a new law written for it , as an element of bullying, that is not already illegal, and that does not have constitutional issues? it's not assault, robbery, threatening, theft, or aggravated assault. so what aspect of bullying needs new legislation? why do we need to give govt. more power in this regards? i've investigated a # of cases that could be described by a layman as "bullying". there are already laws on the books. what is the justification for more laws? and especially haven't our schools already gone WAY too far in the penal approach, we now have cops routinely in schools, DARE programs, "zero tolerance" crap, etc.?

[csziggy]

19. At first I thought it was about this program

Crist, Bowden promote Child ID Kits for students

By Iricka Berlinger • DEMOCRAT STAFF WRITER • November 19, 2009

Ethan Fisher, the son of Florida State Seminoles offensive coordinator Jimbo Fisher, was the first child to receive one of the Child ID Kits that will be distributed to students across the state. Ethan was presented the kit at a news conference with Gov. Charlie Crist and FSU Head Coach Bobby Bowden, representing the American Football Coaches Association, where Wal-Mart presented a check for $186,000 for the purchase of 201,000 kits for every kindergarten student in the state.

Students will receive the kit in their schools in January, which includes an inkless fingerprinting card, a DNA collection envelope and a card to include the child's physical description and photo. The parents will then hold on to the kit in case of an emergency — like if their child goes missing.

"It's awfully important that we understand the importance of protecting our children," Crist said. "This program is designed to prevent situations like the missing girl from Jacksonville who was later found dead."

The kits will allow law enforcement to use the fingerprints and DNA collected in their investigation.

More: http://www.tallahassee.com/article/20091119/NEWS01/911190317/Crist--Bowden-promote-Child-ID-Kits-for-students

Which is a whole different thing. In fact, there have been a rash of incidents locally (Tallahassee, FL) of strangers approaching children. It may be perfectly innocent stuff, but everyone is getting paranoid about child abductions - even the children.

Suspicious Incident At Tallahassee School Bus Stop
Tallahassee Police say there was a suspicious incident involving a 12-year-old girl while she waited for her school bus to pick her up.

Tallahassee Police Department Press Release:

Thursday morning, at approximately 8:30AM, the Tallahassee Police Department responded to a reported suspicious incident located at Devra and Scenic Drive.

Upon arrival, a 12-year-old female informed officers that the driver of a blue pickup truck scared her. According to the female, she was waiting for her school bus when the driver of the pickup stopped and asked her what she was doing.

After a brief conversation the driver pulled into a nearby driveway and began to drive back toward the female. The female became frightened and ran back to her home and contacted the Tallahassee Police Department. The female was not injured during the incident.
http://www.wctv.tv/news/headlines/70474362.html

[DU GrovelBot]

33. ## PLEASE DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##

This week is our fourth quarter 2009 fund drive. Democratic Underground is
a completely independent website. We depend on donations from our members
to cover our costs. Please take a moment to donate! Thank you!