Hamilton, Madison, and Jay

This blog is devoted to a variety of topics including politics, current events, legal issues, and we even take the time to have some occasional fun. After all, blogging is about having a little fun, right?

Location: Mesa, Arizona, United States

Who are we? We're a married couple who has a passion for politics and current events. That's what this site is about. If you read us, you know what we stand for.

Monday, October 13, 2008

Michael Barone on Obama's thuggish practices

Michael Barone is a respected political analyst, and over the weekend he penned a piece about the thuggish tactics endorsed by Obama, and executed by his supporters. If we want a glimpse of what our speech rights would be like under his presidency read Mr. Barone's piece:

"I need you to go out and talk to your friends and talk to your neighbors," Barack Obama told a crowd in Elko, Nev. "I want you to talk to them whether they are independent or whether they are Republican. I want you to argue with them and get in their face." Actually, Obama supporters are doing a lot more than getting into people's faces. They seem determined to shut people up.

That's what Obama supporters, alerted by campaign emails, did when conservative Stanley Kurtz appeared on Milt Rosenberg's WGN radio program in Chicago. Kurtz had been researching Obama's relationship with unrepentant Weather Underground terrorist William Ayers in Chicago Annenberg Challenge papers in the Richard J. Daley Library in Chicago -- papers that were closed off to him for some days, apparently at the behest of Obama supporters.

Obama fans jammed WGN's phone lines and sent in hundreds of protest emails. The message was clear to anyone who would follow Rosenberg's example. We will make trouble for you if you let anyone make the case against The One.

Other Obama supporters have threatened critics with criminal prosecution. In September, St. Louis County Circuit Attorney Bob McCulloch and St. Louis City Circuit Attorney Jennifer Joyce warned citizens that they would bring criminal libel prosecutions against anyone who made statements against Obama that were "false." I had been under the impression that the Alien and Sedition Acts had gone out of existence in 1801-02. Not so, apparently, in metropolitan St. Louis. Similarly, the Obama campaign called for a criminal investigation of the American Issues Project when it ran ads highlighting Obama's ties to Ayers.

These attempts to shut down political speech have become routine for liberals. Congressional Democrats sought to reimpose the "fairness doctrine" on broadcasters, which until it was repealed in the 1980s required equal time for different points of view. The motive was plain: to shut down the one conservative-leaning communications medium, talk radio. Liberal talk-show hosts have mostly failed to draw audiences, and many liberals can't abide having citizens hear contrary views.

The First Amendment is perhaps one of our most precious rights. Not only does it grant us freedom of speech, but also the freedom to practice whichever religion we choose without the fear of government intervention. It also guarantees our right to protest, for us to demand a redress of grievances from the government, and it ensures the press's ability to report new sand opinion minus the government's intrusion. But instead of embracing this simple amendment, Obama and his supporters have embraced what it rampant on college campuses now. That would be the speech codes and thought police that will come down on students who don't espouse the line of thought by the academics in charge.

This past Friday I posted up a piece about how the Left, if Obama wins, and the Congress expands it's Democrat majorities, will work to reconstitute the "fairness doctrine." And they don't just have their sights set on talk radio. No, they want to go after those in the New Media on the Internet, as well. Such a move would literally push the New Media to samizdat levels; going underground and anonymous to keep from being pursued by the government watchdogs.

Mr. Barone's column seems rather prescient given Obama's desire to squelch any sort of dissenting view or opinion. He doesn't want anyone speaking ill of him. Now we could respect that if he's against those that peddle lies like Phil Berg's ridiculous lawsuit proclaiming that Obama isn't an American citizen or the rumors still running around that he's a Muslim when he's not. But we don't deal in rumor and innuendo. Nor do we deal in outright lies about a person, and we won't support those lies.

Barack Obama has some pretty radical ideas for this nation. His economic policies will give us high taxes (higher than those approved of by President Clinton), and protectionist trade practices that make him look more like Herbert Hoover than a breath of fresh air. His policy on the war is retreat, and he will slash the military budget leading to the departure of good men and women from the armed services; the cuts will be an effort to demoralize our military much the way both Presidents Carter and Clinton did. His poor judgment in choosing friends, colleagues, and allies shows that he can't make moral choices. If he embraced people like Bill Ayers, Tony Rezko, and Jeremiah Wright -- proclaiming them friends -- then his desire to meet and negotiate with our enemies should have many people concerned. These aren't lies. We see these things happening, based on what he's said, if he is elected president.

We can't afford to have Obama as a president. Not just economically, but also in the view that this man cares little for the rights we possess, and seemingly has no problem attacking them when it suits his needs.

Publius II


Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home