Wally Parks, NHRA founder, 94. Long Live The King!

September 29, 2007
Wally Parks, the hot-rodder and entrepreneur who curbed drag racing on city streets by steering drivers onto legal racing strips and founded the National Hot Rod Assn., has died. He was 94.

Parks died Friday at St. Joseph Hospital in Burbank, the NHRA announced, without specifying the cause of death.

Today, the NHRA is the world's largest motor sports sanctioning body, best known for its professional race car drivers locked in 300-mph duels over a straight quarter-mile stretch of pavement in 23 national events held each year.

But the Glendora-based organization also has at the grass-roots level more than 80,000 members and 140 member tracks from coast to coast catering to drag racers and their lust for speed.

"Today is a sad day in the world of NHRA and the sport of drag racing," NHRA President Tom Compton said in a statement. "Words simply can't describe the immeasurable impact Wally has had on the sport he created and the millions of people's lives he touched along the way."

As a young man, Parks was one of those hot-rodders. Since the early 1930s, racing fans had gathered at impromptu exhibitions on dry lake beds, back roads, even city streets in Southern California.

Parks started out by racing a modified 1924 Chevrolet at what is now Rogers Dry Lake at Edwards Air Force Base. After joining the Road Runners car club in 1937, he was part of a group that formed the Southern California Timing Assn., one of the nation's first hot-rod car clubs.

"The SCTA began getting heat from government and the media over the incidents of racing on city and country streets, so some of us decided to start a campaign to get racers off the streets," Parks recalled a few years ago. "Back then, the clubs were racing on the dry lakes, but after World War II, we found that abandoned air strips, or ones used only part time, were available."

An unused runway at what is now John Wayne Airport in Orange County became the Santa Ana Drags, the first professional track to charge admission in Southern California. (A strip adjacent to a landing field in Goleta is recognized as the first drag strip of record in Southern California.)

There was no set distance for side-by-side races in those days. It was whatever was available, but Parks determined that a quarter-mile was best because that was about the distance suitable for racing on an airport runway, with enough room after the finish line to stop the cars. He felt the need for a specific distance so that times from any track in the country could be compared to others.

In 1947, Parks, Bob Petersen and Bob Lindsay established Hot Rod magazine in Los Angeles, with Parks as its first editor. Two years later, he gained nationwide recognition for his proposal to open the Bonneville Salt Flats in Utah for speed trials, featuring drivers racing against a stop watch, not just against each other, and emphasizing quickness in addition to speed.

Using Hot Rod magazine as a forum, Parks promoted legal drag racing for enthusiasts of speed and power, as well as for a mainstream audience. In 1951, he formed the NHRA and became its first president.

Parks organized Safety Safaris led by NHRA field officers who traveled around the country showing members how to conduct a safe and standardized drag meet. They also met with local law enforcement to explain their goal of getting racing into a legitimate, controlled environment.

The NHRA's first official race was held at the L.A. County Fairgrounds in Pomona in 1953, and two years later the first national event was run in Great Bend, Kan. Drag racing became standardized, with cars in similar classifications racing a quarter-mile from a standing start. The rewards were modest.

"Just trophies," driver Don Prudhomme told a St. Louis Post-Dispatch reporter in 2001, on the NHRA's 50th anniversary. "We never even thought about making a living doing it, let alone it turning into what it has become. We never dreamed of that."

Nicknamed "the Snake," Prudhomme lined up against Tom "the Mongoose" McEwen and "Big Daddy" Don Garlits.

"There's no question that we had colorful characters," Parks said. "They were part of the foundation, the building of the popularity of drag racing. They developed the show business element of the sport."

By the time Parks left Hot Rod magazine in 1963 to work full time for the NHRA, the sanctioning body had organized in every state across the country. Drag racing fans were attracted to the personable drivers and the exotic cars that had been modified to their powerful essence.

"Being in the pit area is something you can't explain to people and you can't show them on TV," Parks told the Contra Costa Times in 2001. "You have to be there and feel the ground shake and see for yourself the magic of these vehicles."

As performances pushed the limits -- with speeds ticking above 300 mph and topped by Tony Schumacher's 337-mph run at Brainerd, Minn., in August 2005 -- sponsors signed on and TV networks struck deals.

Today, the NHRA trails only NASCAR in U.S. racing popularity. It has an established fan base attending races at stadiums with luxury boxes, its major corporate sponsors include Budweiser and Powerade, and ESPN has a contract to televise its events through 2011.

"It's still a little awesome to me," Parks told The Times in 2001. "None of us had any vision it was going to develop into what it is today. We were trying to create an activity for our particular interest in cars that would be safe and fun."

Parks came to love cars at an early age. Born Jan. 23, 1913, in Goltry, Okla., he was 8 years old when his family moved to California, settling in South Gate. At Jordan High School in Watts, his auto shop instructor had two Model T roadsters that students stripped down to hot rods as class projects.

After high school, Parks became a test driver at a General Motors assembly plant. During World War II, plant production was converted to military vehicles, and he tested tanks for the Army. He later served in the Philippines, where he toyed with a hot-rod Jeep in his free time.

After the war, he returned to work for GM as a road test driver and engineer until 1947. He also jumped right back into the hot-rod scene, becoming general manager of the SCTA, organizing races and car shows. Then it was on to Hot Rod magazine and the NHRA, where he was president until 1984.

A tall man with a deep voice and a statesman-like presence, Parks remained on the NHRA board of directors as its chairman emeritus until his death. He also was chairman of the Wally Parks NHRA Motorsports Museum in Pomona, where a 7-foot statue of him stands at the entrance.

He was drag racing's first inductee into the International Motorsports Hall of Fame in 1992 at Talladega, Ala., and the Motorsports Hall of Fame in 1993 at Novi, Mich.

Within the NHRA itself, Parks was the first recipient of the Don Prudhomme Award in 1994, given to an individual who made a profound impact on the growth of NHRA drag racing.

In 1957, Parks drove his Plymouth Hot Rod Special to a speed record for closed-bodied cars at Daytona Beach during NASCAR's Speed Weeks. Forty years later, at 83, he drove the same car over the Bonneville Salt Flats and the Rogers and El Mirage dry lakes in Southern California. "I did it just for the fun of it," he said. "And to prove to some folks that I could do it."

The '57 Plymouth was honored too. After being displayed at the Walter P. Chrysler Museum's exhibit saluting Chrysler's early Hemi engine performances, it was put in the NHRA museum that carries Parks' name.

Parks, a longtime resident of Glendale, is survived by two sons, Richard and David; five grandchildren; and three great-grandchildren. His wife, Barbara, a secretary at Hot Rod magazine and the NHRA, died in January 2006.

Services were pending.

THE HOUSE THAT WALLY BUILT

The years fly by, and you are eternally missed.

Twenty-one years ago today... Man, it seems like yesterday. Your genius will never be matched and your spirit inspires to this day.

We miss you.

Stutter stepping toward complete abolishment of the Patriot Act.

This is why the states hold the power, and some would-be dictator finally gets his balls in a vise, but not after making as many people suffer as humanly possible.

A federal judge in Oregon ruled yesterday that two provisions of the USA Patriot Act are unconstitutional, marking the second time in as many weeks that the anti-terrorism law has come under attack in the courts.

In a case brought by a Portland man who was wrongly detained as a terrorism suspect in 2004, U.S. District Judge Ann Aiken ruled that the Patriot Act violates the Constitution because it "permits the executive branch of government to conduct surveillance and searches of American citizens without satisfying the probable cause requirements of the Fourth Amendment."

Click Me For The Full WaPo Write-up

End the push for Internet taxation, forever.

The existing federal moratorium on taxes on Internet access will expire on November 1, 2007. Legislation is currently being debated in both houses of the U.S. Congress - H.R. 743 and S. 156 - to avoid this expiration of the current Internet Tax Moratorium. Passage of the 'Permanent Internet Tax Freedom Act of 2007' is the crucial first step needed to ensure that Internet access is not subject to further taxes that would limit consumer choice, delay innovation, and often require consumers to pay more for service. Since 1998, Congress has determined that Internet access should not be subject to multiple state or local taxes, and also that electronic commerce should not be subject to unfair and discriminatory taxes. Wireless is an incredible and ever-evolving resource, as is the Internet, and increasingly many of America's 243 million wireless Americans are now accessing mobile Internet content while on-the-go. Congress should protect American wireless consumers once and for all, and share in a bi-partisan goal of expanding affordable Internet access to all Americans.

What can you do? You can Follow this link and educate yourself further. Just put your contact information in the form and click [Send A Letter]. By putting your zipcode in, it automatically sends a letter to your legislators. Nothing for you to write. No need to try to figure out how to get your point across to your legislators. It's too simple not to do.

You do enjoy surfing the net, right?

ETA: I just want you guys to have this link. It'll make it easier for you to send your message.

Remember me? I am your playbook, and I demand your attention.

America!!! Fuck Yeah!!!

The two posts preceding this one are on the topic of the amnesty that is trying to be piggy-backed on the defense bill, the following is also being piggy-backed on the defense bill, but it is the kind of legislation that we need to get behind.

Contact your Senators and make sure that they support Senate Amendment 2022: The restoration of habeas corpus.

That's right. The restoration of habeas corpus. Finally accepting that the Military Commissions Act was a clear attack on the Constitution, people are starting to attempt to recover some of our national honor and dignity.

Follow Me to Sen. Leahy's statement.

The following is excerpted from Sen. Leahy's Statement.

This is wrong. It is unconstitutional. It is un-American.

ETA: Sadly we could not defeat the filibuster today and this issue was squashed, continuing the subversion of the Constitution and any person's rights to face his accuser.

They have a DREAM... It's our nightmare.

This is a continuation of the 9.17.2007 post, addressing the immigration amnesty. I mean, come on, could you get any more blatant in your handing over the country? They don't even try to hide it anymore. Why? Because they know that you aren't paying attention. They know that football and American Idol have you occupied and that you'd rather eat glass than pay any attention to what's going on, let alone turning off the television and actually giving a shit.

WE HAVE EFFECTIVE IMMIGRATION LEGISLATION ALREADY ON THE BOOKS, PEOPLE. IF WE ENFORCE WHAT IS ALREADY LAW, THERE IS NO ROOM FOR COMPLAINT, AND NO NEED FOR ANYTHING FURTHER.

A Sleeper Amnesty: Time to Wake Up from the DREAM Act
by Kris W. Kobach, D.Phil., J.D.
Backgrounder #2069

Just three months after the Senate immigration bill met its well-deserved end, amnesty advocates in the U.S. Congress resumed their efforts. Recently, Senator Richard Durbin (D–IL) announced on the Senate floor his intention to offer the Development, Relief, and Edu­cation for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act as an amend­ment to the defense authorization bill.

The DREAM Act (S. 774) is a nightmare. It is a mas­sive amnesty that extends to the millions of illegal aliens who entered the United States before the age of 16. The illegal alien who applies for this amnesty is immediately rewarded with "conditional" lawful per­manent resident (green card) status, which can be converted to a non-conditional green card in short order. The alien can then use his newly acquired status to seek green cards for the parents who brought him in illegally in the first place. In this way, it is also a back­door amnesty for the millions of illegal aliens who brought their children with them to the United States.

What is less well known about the DREAM Act is that it also allows illegal aliens to receive in-state tuition rates at public universities, discriminating against U.S. citizens from out of state and law-abiding foreign students. It repeals a 1996 federal law that pro­hibits any state from offering in-state tuition rates to illegal aliens unless the state also offers in-state tuition rates to all U.S. citizens.

On its own, the DREAM Act never stood a chance of passing. Every scientific opinion poll on the subject has shown over 70 percent opposition to giving in-state tuition benefits to illegal aliens.

Not surprisingly, the DREAM Act languished in committee for five years after it was first introduced in 2001—until the opportunity arose to hitch it to the Senate's "comprehensive" immigration bills of 2006 and 2007.

To understand just what an insult to the rule of law the DREAM Act is, it is important to look at the history behind it.

A Brief History of the In-State Tuition Debate
In September 1996, Congress passed the land­mark Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRIRA). Led by Lamar Smith (R– TX) in the House of Representatives and Alan Simp­son (R–WY) in the Senate, Congress significantly toughened the nation's immigration laws. To his credit, President Bill Clinton signed the bill into law.

Open-borders advocates in some states—most notably California—had already raised the possibil­ity of offering in-state tuition rates to illegal aliens who attend public universities. To prevent such a development, the IIRIRA's sponsors inserted a clearly worded provision that prohibited any state from doing so unless it provided the same dis­counted tuition to all U.S. citizens:

Notwithstanding any other provision of law, an alien who is not lawfully present in the United States shall not be eligible on the basis of residence within a State (or a polit­ical subdivision) for any postsecondary education benefit unless a citizen or national of the United States is eligible for such a benefit (in no less an amount, dura­tion, and scope) without regard to whether the citizen or national is such a resident.

Members of Congress reasoned that no state would be interested in giving up the extra revenue from out-of-state students, so this provision would ensure that illegal aliens would not be rewarded with a taxpayer-subsidized college education. The IIRIRA's proponents never imagined that some states might simply disobey federal law.

States Subsidizing the College Education of Illegal Aliens
However, that is precisely what happened. In 1999, radical liberals in the California legislature pushed ahead with their plan to have taxpayers sub­sidize the college education of illegal aliens.

Assemblyman Marco Firebaugh (D) sponsored a bill that would have made illegal aliens who had resided in California for three years during high school eligible for in-state tuition rates at California community colleges and universities. In August 2000, the California legislature passed his bill. However, Democrat Governor Gray Davis vetoed the bill in September 2000, stating clearly in his veto message that the bill would violate federal law:

[U]ndocumented aliens are ineligible to receive postsecondary education benefits based on state residence…. IIRIRA would require that all out-of-state legal residents be eligible for this same benefit. Based on Fall 1998 enrollment figures…this legisla­tion could result in a revenue loss of over $63.7 million to the state.

Undeterred, Firebaugh introduced his bill again, and the California legislature passed it again. In 2002, facing flagging poll numbers and desperate to rally Hispanic voters to his cause, Governor Davis signed the bill.

Meanwhile, similar interests in Texas had suc­ceeded in enacting their own version of the bill. Since then, interest groups lobbying for illegal aliens have introduced similar legislation in most of the other states. The majority of state legislatures had the good sense to reject the idea, but eight states fol­lowed the examples of California and Texas, includ­ing some states in the heart of "red" America. Today, the 10 states that offer in-state tuition rates to illegal aliens are: California, Illinois, Kansas, Nebraska, New Mexico, New York, Oklahoma, Texas, Utah, and Washington. (The legislatures of Maryland and Connecticut passed similar bills in 2007, but the governors of those states rightly vetoed the bills.)

In most of these 10 states, the law was passed under cover of darkness because public opinion was strongly against subsidizing the college educa­tion of illegal aliens at taxpayer expense. The gover­nors even declined to hold press conferences or signing ceremonies heralding the new laws.

Not surprisingly, when voters themselves decide the question, a very different result occurs. In November 2006, Arizona voters passed Proposition 300, which expressly barred Arizona universities from offering in-state tuition rates to illegal aliens— 71.4 percent voted in favor.

The American people realize the injustice of giving illegal aliens a taxpayer-subsidized education when out-of-state U.S. citizens and law-abiding foreign students have to pay the full cost of their education.

This strong public sentiment against giving ille­gal aliens access to in-state tuition rates is powerful enough to swing the results of an election. In Nebraska, the last of the 10 states to pass the law, that is exactly what happened. During the 2006 session, Nebraska's unicameral legislature passed an in-state tuition bill for illegal aliens. Governor Dave Heineman vetoed the bill because it violated federal law and was bad policy. In mid-April the legislature, which included an unusually large number of lame-duck Senators, overrode his veto by a vote of 30 to 19.

The veto would become an issue in the 2006 Republican gubernatorial primary. Heineman's opponent was the legendary University of Nebraska football coach and sitting U.S. Representative Tom Osborne, a political demigod in the Cornhusker State. Osborne had never received less than 82 percent of the vote in any election. Heineman, on the other hand, had not yet won a gubernatorial election. He became governor in 2005 when Gov­ernor Mike Johanns resigned to become U.S. Secre­tary of Agriculture.

Few believed that Heineman had a chance of winning the primary. He was behind in all of the polls. But then Coach Osborne fumbled. During a debate, he stated that he favored the idea of giving subsidized tuition to illegal aliens. Heineman seized the opportunity, and highlighted this difference of opinion between the candidates in his political ads. The voters reacted negatively to Osborn's position, and Heineman surged ahead in the final weeks of the race. He beat Osborn by 50 percent to 44 per­cent in the primary election on May 9, 2006. After the vote, both candidates said that the in-state tuition issue had been decisive.

State-Subsidized Lawbreaking
In all 10 states, the in-state tuition laws make for shockingly bad policy.

First, providing in-state tuition rates to illegal aliens amounts to giving them a taxpayer-financed education. In contrast, out-of-state students pay the full cost of their education. This gift to illegal aliens costs taxpayers a great deal of money at a time when tuition rates are rising across the country. For exam­ple, in California, a lawsuit on the matter has re­vealed the staggering cost to the taxpayer: The state pays more than $100 million annually to subsidize the college education of thousands of illegal aliens.

Second, these states are encouraging aliens to vio­late federal immigration law. Indeed, in some of the states, breaking federal law is an express prerequi­site to receive the benefit of in-state tuition rates. Those states expressly deny in-state tuition to legal aliens who have valid student visas. And in all 10 states, an alien is eligible for in-state tuition rates only if he remains in the state in violation of federal law and evades federal law enforcement. In this way states are directly rewarding this illegal behavior.

This situation is comparable to a state passing a law that rewards residents with state tax credits for cheating on their federal income taxes. These states are providing direct financial subsidies to those who violate federal law.

Third, not only are such laws unfair to aliens who follow the law, but they are slaps in the faces of law-abiding American citizens. For example, a student from Missouri who attends Kansas University and has always played by the rules and obeyed the law is charged three times the tuition charged to an alien whose very presence in the country is a violation of federal criminal law.

This gift to illegal aliens comes at a time when millions of U.S. citizens have had to mortgage their future to attend college. During 2002–2007, college costs rose 35 percent after adjusting for inflation. Two-thirds of college students now graduate with debt, and the amount of debt averages $19,200. In a world of scarce education resources, U.S. citizens should be first in line to receive a break on college costs—not aliens who break federal law.

Even if a good argument could be made for giv­ing in-state tuition benefits to illegal aliens, the bot­tom line is that the policy violates federal law. These 10 states have brazenly cast aside the constraints imposed by Congress and the U.S. Constitution.

Pending Lawsuits
In July 2004, a group of U.S. citizen students from out of state filed suit in federal district court in Kansas to enjoin the state from providing in-state tuition rates to illegal aliens.They pointed out that Kansas is clearly violating federal law, as well as vio­lating the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Con­stitution by discriminating against them in favor of illegal aliens.

The district judge did not render any decision on the central questions of the case. Instead, he avoided the issues entirely by ruling that the plain­tiffs lacked a private right of action to bring their statutory challenge and lacked standing to bring their Equal Protection challenge. The case is cur­rently before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.

Meanwhile, in December 2005, another group of U.S. citizen students filed a class-action suit in a California state court.They too maintain that the state is violating federal law and the U.S. Constitu­tion. Pursuant to a California civil rights statute, they are also seeking damages to compensate them for the extra tuition that they have paid above that charged to illegal aliens.

The DREAM Act Amnesty
Now, just when it looks as if U.S. citizens might vindicate their rights under federal law and the way­ward states might be held accountable, Senator Durbin and his pro-amnesty allies are seeking to offer the offending states a pardon.

The DREAM Act grants an unusual reprieve to the 10 states that have ignored federal law. The Act retroactively repeals the 1996 federal law that the 10 states violated, making it as though the provi­sions in the 1996 law never existed.

On top of this insult to the rule of law, the DREAM Act includes a massive amnesty, as noted above. This amnesty opens a wide path to citizen­ship for any alien who entered the country before the age of 16 and has been in the country for at least five years. The guiding notion seems to be "The longer you have violated federal law, the better."

Beyond that, all the alien needs is a high school diploma or a GED earned in the United States. If he can persuade an institution of higher education in the United States—any community college, technical school, or college—to admit him, that will suffice. Any illegal alien who meets these con­ditions (or who can produce fraudulent papers indicating that he meets the conditions) gets immediate legal status in the form of a "condi­tional" green card good for six years, according to Section 4(a)(1).

It is important to recognize just how sweeping this amnesty is.

* There is no upper age limit. Any illegal alien can walk into a U.S. Customs and Immigration Ser­vices office and declare that he is eligible. For example, a 45 year old can claim that he illegally entered the United States 30 years ago at the age of 15. There is no requirement that the alien prove that he entered the United States at the claimed time by providing particular documents. The DREAM Act's Section 4(a) merely requires him to "demonstrate" that he is eligible—which in practice could mean simply making a sworn statement to that effect. Thus, it is an invitation for just about every illegal alien to fraudulently claim the amnesty.

* The alien then has six years to adjust his status from a conditional green card holder to a non-conditional one. To do so, he need only complete two years of study at an institution of higher edu­cation. If the alien has already completed two years of study, he can convert to non-conditional status immediately (and use his green card as a platform to bring in family members). As an alternative to two years of study, he can enlist in the U.S. military and spend two years there. This provision allows Senator Durbin to claim that the DREAM Act is somehow germane to a defense authorization bill.

* An illegal alien who applies for the DREAM Act amnesty gets to count his years under "condi­tional" green card status toward the five years needed for citizenship. (Section 5(e)) On top of that, the illegal alien could claim "retroactive benefits" and start the clock running the day that the DREAM Act is enacted. (Section 6) In combi­nation, these two provisions put illegal aliens on a high-speed track to U.S. citizenship—moving from illegal alien to U.S. citizen in as little as five years. Lawfully present aliens, meanwhile, must follow a slower path to citizenship.

* It would be absurdly easy for just about any ille­gal alien—even one who does not qualify for the amnesty—to evade the law. According to Section 4(f) of the DREAM Act, once an alien files an application—any application, no matter how ridiculous—the federal government is prohib­ited from deporting him. Moreover, with few exceptions, federal officers are prohibited from either using information from the application to deport the alien or sharing that information with another federal agency, under threat of up to $10,000 fine. Thus, an alien's admission that he has violated federal immigration law cannot be used against him—even if he never had any chance of qualifying for the DREAM Act amnesty in the first place.

The DREAM Act also makes the illegal aliens eli­gible for federal student loans and federal work-study programs—another benefit that law-abiding foreign students cannot receive—all at taxpayer expense. A consistent theme emerges: Illegal aliens are treated much more favorably than aliens who fol­low the law. There is no penalty for illegal behavior.

Conclusion
In addition to being a dream for those who have broken the law, the DREAM Act raises an even larger issue regarding the relationship between states and the federal government. The 10 states have created a 21st century version of the nullification move­ment—defying federal law simply because they do not like it. In so doing, they have challenged the basic structure of the republic. The DREAM Act would pardon this offense and, in so doing, encour­age states to defy other federal law in the future.

One thing that we have learned in the struggle to enforce our nation's immigration laws is that states cannot be allowed to undermine the efforts of the federal government to enforce the law. Only if all levels of government are working in concert to uphold the rule of law can it be fully restored.

Ready for another round of "Let's slip the immigration bill through,"?

It's time to warm up the fax machine, email, and telephone. Your representatives think that you've forgotten about the immigration bill, and have decided to slip it to you a little at a time. Just what we expected.


Immigration Again [Kathryn Jean Lopez]

From Congressional Quarterly:

Democrats Try to Revive Immigration Provisions

By Michael Sandler and Bart Jansen, CQ Staff

Senate Democrats plan to use the defense authorization bill next week to revive a provision from the failed immigration overhaul that would put some children of illegal immigrants on a path to citizenship.

Meanwhile, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., is working to bring to the floor another provision from the immigration bill (S 1639) that would create a guest worker program for up to 1.5 million agricultural workers (S 340).

Both efforts are likely to rekindle the kind of heated debate that engulfed the Senate when the immigration overhaul measure was being considered in June.

Majority Whip Richard J. Durbin, D-Ill., is expected to offer an amendment to the defense bill (HR 1585) that would attach legislation (S 774) to allow children of illegal immigrants who entered the United States before age 16 and lived here at least five years to gain conditional legal status and eventual citizenship if they attend college or join the military for at least two years.

Durbin said Wednesday he is working on the amendment and contacting colleagues to gauge support.

“The Department of Defense has endorsed this, and I think it would be of value,” he said in an interview.

Durbin said Feinstein is searching for the right vehicle. One possibility could be the upcoming five-year farm bill, which is expected to reach the Senate floor next month.

Injecting immigration into the defense debate could be a risky move, with Republicans likely to accuse Democrats of tying up legislation needed to help U.S. troops.

Moreover, even supporters of more lenient treatment of illegal immigrants have expressed doubts that any such measure could pass after the crushing blow it suffered June 28, when proponents failed to get even a majority of votes to end debate on the comprehensive bill.

Durbin said he’s aware of such reservations, but he suggested that waiting until next year, when election-year politics will be in full bloom, would make it even more difficult to act.

He noted that senators from both parties had approached him immediately after the broader bill fell and encouraged him to move forward with the education legislation, known as the DREAM Act.

“I think there is room here for senators who opposed the comprehensive bill to still support the DREAM Act,” Durbin said.

Among those working with him to advance the measure will be Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., sponsor of the broader immigration bill. An aide to Kennedy said Durbin’s amendment is relevant to the defense bill because it would offer an incentive for children seeking legal status to join the military.

“There will be a strong effort to get this done this year,” the aide said.

Opponents at the Ready

Frank Sharry, executive director for the National Immigration Forum, which lobbied for the broad bill earlier this year, said that having an alternative strategy for passing highly contentious legislation is a necessity in such an evenly divided Congress.

“Most legislation does get done as riders on appropriations or authorization bills,” Sharry said. “That’s how it happens. This is really the way business gets done.”

The tactic of picking out potentially popular provisions of the immigration bill has already yielded some success.

The Senate in July voted, 89-1, to attach a provision to the Homeland Security spending bill (HR 2638) that provided $3 billion in emergency spending for border security.

But the Democratic proposals are not likely to enjoy that kind of support.

Indeed, one of the harshest critics of the comprehensive legislation called a news conference Wednesday to voice his objections to the plans to breathe new life into it.

Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., said the proposals could put more than 4 million illegal immigrants on a path to citizenship. That is about one-third of the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants who would have benefited from the comprehensive immigration overhaul bill he helped kill earlier this year, Sessions said.

LET'S START A WAR!!! The 60 Minutes you weren't supposed to see.

There's some Ron Paul stuff at the end of this item. You're either pro Ron Paul or you're not, but that's not the issue of this post. The 60 Minutes segment speaks for itself.

Remember when I went on about Iron Maiden earlier in the year?

Whoa to you of earth and sea,
for the devil sends the beast with wrath
because he knows that time is short
let him who have understanding
recon the number of the beast
for it is a human number
its number
is six-hundred-and-sixty-six

Shit is about to get spiritual!

I'm not sure exactly where I'm going to have to fly, drive, hitch-hike, or crawl to, but you can bet your undead ass that I'm going to be there.

Even if the tickets are priced that the astronomical prices of the fucking Van Halen tix.

The 'SOMEWHERE BACK IN TIME' World Tour 2008 will be in three sections, starting in February and March 2008 with the first leg encompassing major concerts in 20 selected cities on five continents in seven weeks including India, Japan, North America, Central and South America, and, of course, Australia, opening in Perth on Feb 4 and continuing through Melbourne, Sydney and Brisbane.

To tie in with forthcoming 2008 releases on DVD of the classic 'LIVE AFTER DEATH' and 'MAIDEN ENGLAND' concert videos (more details coming soon) this tour, aptly entitled 'SOMEWHERE BACK IN TIME', will revisit the band's history by focusing almost entirely on the 80's in both choice of songs played and the stage set, which will be based around the legendary Egyptian Production of the 1984-85 'Powerslave Tour'. This will arguably be the most elaborate and spectacular show the band have ever presented, and will include some key elements of their Somewhere In Time tour of 1986/7, such as the Cyborg Eddie.

Apparently the end time is near, folks. I never thought that I'd ever get to see anything close to the Powerslave show, ever again. To hear that we not only get the Powerslave set, but Eddie from the SIT tour. It's about as close to rapture as you're ever going to get.

I'll be putting together an mP3 player for the IRGM MySpace as the time draws neigh.

In the meantime, go visit Iron Maiden dot com for some kick-ass schwag and news straight from the abyss.

Lions and Tigers and Bears... OH MY!!!

See that image up there? Keep coming back to it in the coming days. In four days it will be the 6th anniversary of 9/11. Now, you know me, I don't like to use 9/11 as an example for anything, and even more so, I despise the media and the White House for using 9/11, Sept. 11, and any other reference, when attempting to justify the further usurpation of the Constitution.

Here's the rub. Osama, is supposed to magically make a State of the Union to the American people on 9-11-07. Convenient, huh? The propaganda machine is running overtime and extra oilers had to be hired just so this machine wouldn't burn itself to the ground. The machine is fabricating fear and apprehension in order for you to support anything that they may say or do. You'll be teary eyed in remembrance, you'll be afraid that something terrible is going to happen, because that bad man bin Laden is making another speech. Never mind the fact that we haven't heard from Osama in years. But hey, his showing up on the anniversary of a crime that he's been accused of and you should be afraid, right?


Never mind that after he had served his purpose and we were in the full run up to the invasion of Iraq that Mr. Bush stated, when asked about bin Laden, "I don't know where he is. I don't know and I really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority." OK, whatever you say. Seems that we're making a pretty large fuss over a man who isn't important, and not our priority. Oh, wait, damn... He wasn't important then, because we had used him as a straw man to create fear and hatred in the hearts of the American people. He wasn't our priority because we put him back into the box to be used another day. Well, that day is coming up folks. Your about to get a dose of bin Laden with your breakfast, lunch, and diner. Why? Because you don't really buy the, "Let's invade IRAN!!!" line... Yet. You have to be stormed in on during the middle of the night by cardboard bin Ladens in order to placate you and send you back to your remotes and the latest episode of whateverthefuck you watch.

Remember, the New York Times told you earlier this week that you should get over 9/11 already, damn. You need to let go of the past and just stop worrying about what happened.

You just keep your eye on that image up there. And while you're looking at it, take notes on the complete line of shit that you're being spoon fed.

Just fucking pay attention and stop toeing the party line. There is no party anymore. Anyone who holds on to the party line and tells you that they'd be glad to give up some freedoms to keep the lifestyle that they currently enjoy is a fucking five-gallon-bucket full more dangerous than a straw man put up by the propaganda machine in order to put doubt and fear in your hearts. Osama? The last bin Laden video was in October 2004, shortly before the U.S. presidential elections. Convenient? As Buggs would say, "Meh, could be."

Oh, and by the way, Michael Chertoff says that your 'unequivocally' safer now than you were before 9/11. Now, don't you feel better? What will make you feel even more safe? Grounding every single USAF plane that is tasked for the protection of the US should do it, right? When? Sept. 14, 2007. Look that one up on your own.

In the words of a couple good men:

"Good night, and good luck."

Just want to give a shout-out!!

To all my fans at the Los Alamos National Lab, National Security Section, I hope you enjoy my blog. It's not much, but I occasionally use some big words like liberty, Constitution, freedom, Bill of Rights, and such. If you need a primer, I'll be glad to help.

Seeing that I've made the list, can I use you guys as references when Austin PD does my background check in the near future?

Have a great day, and if there are any topics that you would like me to touch upon, please do not hesitate to ask. I'll be glad to write on a topic that concerns you.

I'll let you guys mull it over.

To add... I think that it's cool that you guys did a direct Google search for Independent Rebellion to get to my blog. If you need any graphic design work or maybe some machining done, don't hesitate to ask.

Oh, and please come back tomorrow. I'd like nothing more than to see you guys as returning visitors.

Then again, you could just be a guy(s) that I hang out with on other areas of the Intarweb. In that case, someone tell Darren that I'll likely be sending my information this week.

Cya!

Yeah, we have to pull out of Iraq... Because we're going to Iran.

This goes along with my 8.28.2007 post on Iran.

It's better if you don't get me started. Just read the link, please.

IRAN OR BUST!!

What the fuck?!!!!

It seems that the train has derailed and the wheels are flying off in every direction. This is a bit of a recap. I've been busy.

Q So you need those Australian troops there.

THE PRESIDENT: We need all our coalition partners. And I would hope that -- and I understand, look, everybody has got their own internal politics. My only point is, is that whether it be Afghanistan or Iraq, we've got more work to do. We, the free world, has got more work to do. And I believe those of us who live in liberty have a responsibility to promote forms of government that deal with what causes 19 kids to get on airplanes to kill 3,000 students.

Yeah, you read that right. The President of the United States now states that the 3000 people killed on 9/11 were students, and the alleged hijackers were "kids". Kids?

I know, you're saying, "Wrench, you've got to be kidding! We know that you're down on the administration and pretty much any Republican or Democrat who violates the Constitution, but this is insane!" Hey people, I couldn't make this shit up.

FOLLOW THE LINK... IT'S THE THIRD QUESTION DOWN

Ok, on to other items that need to be addressed.

Anyone who has spent more than 45 minutes in the 21st century knows that information, especially the electronic kind, not only does not get lost, but cannot be destroyed. Regardless of that knowledge, the White House says that you're all dipshits who have no idea how these magic computer thingies work and that once an item is lost/deleted, there is no recovering it.

Oh, and by the way, "Hey America, it's none of your fucking business who the company was who handled the information, because if you knew the name of the company, you could subpoena their records and actually find the missing stuff that we told you magically disappeared and cannot be retrieved! Now, go fuck yourself!"

LINK TO ABC ARTICLE ON HOW STUPID THE WHITE HOUSE THINKS YOU ARE

NEXT!!

"You're suing us because we violated your rights? Well, tough shit, Mr. Bush says that your law suits and your legal rights don't count, because we're the next in line to get immunity from you, the American people, and we don't have to answer to you or your government officials! Now, go fuck yourself!"

LINK TO MSNBC ARTICLE ILLUSTRATING THE QUICKEST WAY TO SHUT YOU UP

As if it isn't clear, there is a running theme to my post today. I'm not sure how many people actually read my blog, but I urge you, even if there is just one of you, to not take my word for anything, take my links and see for yourself.