The Obama Administration Is Criminalizing Dissent? Intimidating Its Ideological Opponents? You Must Be Joking

"I'm still digging out of my various pre-election hate mail piles — you know, 'How could say Obama is a socialist who will redistribute wealth just because he used to be a member of a socialist party and criticized the Warren Court for failing to order the redistribution of wealth?'; 'How could you say Obama is a Left-wing radical rather than a centrist moderate just because he made common cause with Bill Ayers, Bernadine Dohrn, Mike Klonsky, Jeremiah Wright, Frank Marshall Davis, et al?'; 'How could you say Obama would be an extremist on abortion and other life issues just because he supported infanticide as a Chicago legislator?'; 'How could you say Obama would be anti-Israel in his governance and appointments just because he pals around with Rashid Khalidi?'; 'How could you say an Obama administration would turn TARP into a Big Government slush fund just because he managed the Chicago Annenberg Challenge as a Big Lefty slush fund?'; 'How could you say Obama will be soft on Iran just because Obama is soft on Iran?'; etc. But I note that I got plenty for this one, too:

"I’ll be blunt: Sen. Obama and his supporters despise free expression, the bedrock of American self-determinism and hence American democracy. What’s more, like garden-variety despots, they see law not as a means of ensuring liberty but as a tool to intimidate and quell dissent....

"[I]n St. Louis, local law-enforcement authorities, dominated by Democrat-party activists, [are] threatening libel prosecutions against Obama’s political opposition. County Circuit Attorney Bob McCulloch and City Circuit Attorney Jennifer Joyce, abetted by a local sheriff and encouraged by the Obama campaign, warned that members of the public who dared speak out against Obama during the campaign’s crucial final weeks would face criminal libel charges — if, in the judgment of these conflicted officials, such criticism of their champion was 'false.'

"The chill wind was bracing. The Taliban could not better rig matters. The Prophet of Change is only to be admired, not questioned. In the stretch run of an American election, there is to be no examination of a candidate for the world’s most powerful office — whether about his radical record, the fringe Leftism that lies beneath his thin, centrist veneer, his enabling of infanticide, his history of race-conscious politics, his proposals for unprecedented confiscation and distribution of private property (including a massive transfer of American wealth to third-world dictators through international bureaucrats), his ruinous economic policies that have helped leave Illinois a financial wreck, his place at the vortex of the credit market implosion that has put the U.S. economy on the brink of meltdown, his aggressive push for American withdrawal and defeat in Iraq, his easy gravitation to America-hating activists, be they preachers like Jeremiah Wright, terrorists like Bill Ayers, or Communists like Frank Marshall Davis. Comment on any of this and risk indictment or, at the very least, government harassment and exorbitant legal fees.

Nor was this an isolated incident.

Item: When the American Issues Project ran political ads calling attention to Obama’s extensive ties to Ayers, the Weatherman terrorist who brags about having bombed the Pentagon and the U.S. Capitol, the Obama campaign pressured the Justice Department to launch an absurd criminal prosecution.

"Item: When commentator Stanley Kurtz of the Ethics and Public Policy Center was invited on a Chicago radio program to discuss his investigation of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, an “education reform” project in which Obama and Ayers (just 'a guy who lives in my neighborhood') collaborated to dole out over $100 million, the Obama campaign issued an Internet action alert. Supporters, armed with the campaign’s non-responsive talking points, dutifully flooded the program with calls and emails, protesting Kurtz’s appearance and attempting to shout him down.

"Item: Both Obama and his running mate, Sen. Joe Biden, have indicated that an Obama administration would use its control of the Justice Department to prosecute its political opponents, including Bush administration officials responsible for the national security policies put in effect after nearly 3000 Americans were killed in the 9/11 attacks.

"Item: There is a troubling report that the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Section, top officials of which are Obama contributors, has suggested criminal prosecutions against those they anticipate will engage in voter 'intimidation' or 'oppression' in an election involving a black candidate (read "black Democratic candidate -- Robert) . (Memo to my former DOJ colleagues: In a system that presumes innocence even after crimes have undeniably been committed, responsible prosecutors don’t assume non-suspects will commit future law violations — especially when doing so necessarily undermines the First Amendment freedoms those prosecutors solemnly swear to uphold.) [Emphasis added.]"

Obama's Internet tyranny

If you were the President and you did not like blogs, such as this one, exposing you with facts that are available 24/7, what would you do???

"WorldNetDaily reported on Saturday that a pair of recently introduced Senate bills would give the President sweeping powers to control the Internet, including a complete shut-down of this all-important network of networks for 'cyber emergencies.' If you are not now hearing the warning wail of the sirens of tyranny, you should be. Obama's dystopian, socialist, tyrannical agenda has only just begun, using the current 'economic crisis' as both rationalization and rationale for an increase in government control over our private lives that has been unequaled since FDR's day.

"In Technocracy, we have discussed the dangers of lack of net neutrality and the implementation of thoughtcrime that results when governments attempt to constrain what you may read (and therefore what you may think). The battle to control the Internet is this battle to establish thoughtcrime writ large. It is the culmination of every lesser attempt by governments and private entities alike to control some portion of what you access online, because it addresses the medium rather than the media it carries.

"We tread a very fine line between the rights to freedom of speech and to assembly, which are natural rights, and a claim of access to others' venues. You have the right to speak, but not the guarantee to be heard; you have the right to assemble, but not on your neighbor's property. The Internet, as a curious shared resource that is at once both public and private, is arguably a public necessity (as a component of infrastructure) but one that is privately owned (as brought to you through paid service providers, to whose equipment you don't have a right of access or ownership). What is easily discerned, however, is the difference between private citizens exchanging information and data of their own free will, and invasive government interference with that activity. The former is protected by the First Amendment. The latter is an unconstitutional violation of your civil rights, of the type in which the Obama administration has indicated it is only too willing to engage.

"If we refuse to fight this battle for the Internet, we allow private and public entities to turn us into thought-criminals by robbing us of our civil rights. I have no desire to live in Orwell's dystopia as interpreted by Barack Hussein Obama."

Phoenix police raid home of blogger whose writing is highly critical of them

"In what should send a frightening chill down the spine of every blogger, writer, journalist and First Amendment advocate in the United States, Phoenix police raided the home of a blogger who has been highly critical of the department.

"Jeff Pataky, who runs Bad Phoenix Cops, said the officers confiscated three computers, routers, modems, hard drives, memory cards and everything necessary to continue blogging.

"The 41-year-old software engineer said they also confiscated numerous personal files and documents relating to a pending lawsuit he has against the department alleging harassment - which he says makes it obvious the raid was an act of retaliation."

Just like in a dictatorship.

Obama order worries speech groups

"Free speech advocates from across the political spectrum are accusing President Barack Obama of impinging on First Amendment rights and are gearing up to take their case public."

What did you expect?

Australia to implement mandatory internet censorship

Coming to a country near you....

Australia To Enforce Mandatory Chinese-Style Internet Censorship

We are next if you are not vigilant. This is stepping all over your and my toes:

"If we allow Australia to become the first 'free' nation to impose Internet censorship, the snowball effect will only accelerate - the U.S. and the UK are next."

and

"In April 2007, Time magazine reported that researchers funded by the federal government want to shut down the internet and start over, citing the fact that at the moment there are loopholes in the system whereby users cannot be tracked and traced all the time. The projects echo moves we have previously reported on to clamp down on internet neutrality and even to designate a new form of the internet known as Internet 2.

"Moves to regulate the web have increased over the last two years.

- In a display of bi-partisanship, there have been calls for all out mandatory ISP snooping on all US citizens by both Democrats and Republicans alike. (Snoop on you -- Ed.)

- In December 2006, Republican Senator John McCain tabled a proposal to introduce legislation that would fine blogs up to $300,000 for offensive statements, photos and videos posted by visitors on comment boards. It is well known that McCain has a distaste for his blogosphere critics, causing a definite conflict of interest where any proposal to restrict blogs on his part is concerned. (Sorry Senator, there still is Freedom of Speech. And that goes for you too Senator Obama. Such proposals to fine blogs are technically illegal. -- Ed.)

- During an appearance with his wife Barbara on Fox News in November 2006, George Bush senior slammed Internet bloggers for creating an “adversarial and ugly climate.” (So? -- Ed.)

- The White House’s own de-classified strategy for “winning the war on terror” targets Internet conspiracy theories as a recruiting ground for terrorists and threatens to “diminish” their influence.

- The Pentagon has also announced its effort to infiltrate the Internet and propagandize for the war on terror.

- In an October 2006 speech, Homeland Security director Michael Chertoff identified the web as a “terror training camp,” through which “disaffected people living in the United States” are developing “radical ideologies and potentially violent skills.” His solution is “intelligence fusion centers,” staffed by Homeland Security personnel which will are already in operation.

- The U.S. Government wants to force bloggers and online grassroots activists to register and regularly report their activities to Congress. Criminal charges including a possible jail term of up to one year could be the punishment for non-compliance. (If they cannot register the media, then they cannot register bloggers. Freedom of the press (media) and Freedom of Speech -- Ed.)

- A landmark November 2006 legal case on behalf of the Recording Industry Association of America and other global trade organizations sought to criminalize all Internet file sharing of any kind as copyright infringement, effectively shutting down the world wide web - and their argument was supported by the U.S. government.

- A landmark legal ruling in Sydney goes further than ever before in setting the trap door for the destruction of the Internet as we know it and the end of alternative news websites and blogs by creating the precedent that simply linking to other websites is breach of copyright and piracy. (Oh my! -- Ed.)

- The European Union, led by former Stalinist John Reid, has also vowed to shut down “terrorists” who use the Internet to spread propaganda.

- The EU data retention bill, passed after much controversy and implemented in 2007, obliges telephone operators and internet service providers to store information on who called who and who emailed who for at least six months. Under this law, investigators in any EU country, and most bizarrely even in the US, can access EU citizens’ data on phone calls, sms’, emails and instant messaging services.

- The EU also proposed legislation that would prevent users from uploading any form of video without a license.

- The US government is also funding research into social networking sites and how to gather and store personal data published on them, according to the New Scientist magazine. “At the same time, US lawmakers are attempting to force the social networking sites themselves to control the amount and kind of information that people, particularly children, can put on the sites.”

"Governments are furious that their ceaseless lies are being exposed in real time on the World Wide Web and have resolved to stifle, regulate and control what truly is the last outpost of real free speech in the world. Internet censorship is perhaps the most pertinent issue that freedom advocates should rally to combat over the course of the next few years, lest we allow a cyber-gag to be placed over our mouths and say goodbye to our last medium of free and open communication."

Obama and the conspiratorial media

"I am sincerely worried that if Obama

wins, the checks and balances incorporated into our Constitution may not be enough to prevent a radical and irreversible diminution of our individual liberties, because a confluence of factors has emerged to create a climate conducive to fundamental change.

"These factors are: a shockingly unknown candidate whose mysterious past and numerous shady alliances are deliberately left unexplored by a corrupt, supportive media; the candidate's charismatic qualities that inspire a cultish loyalty; his intellectual trappings that create a fascination and allure among the intellectual elite, including some hypnotized conservatives; a major financial crisis that exacerbates the people's fears and uncertainties; a largely manufactured cloud of negativity placed over America by the media and a grossly partisan Democratic Party that places its self-interest above the national interest; and an apparently discredited Republican Party and conservative movement that have been blamed for our actual and perceived problems."

"All of these could lead to entrusting this man with unprecedented power, giving him a license to operate with minimum scrutiny and an opposition party effectively impotent to oppose his radical blueprint for America."

and

"Would Obama win if people believed he might well nationalize health care, unilaterally disarm our nuclear weapons, push the Global Poverty Act, appoint judges to the left of Ruth Bader Ginsburg, pass legislation

banning handguns, greatly increase federal spending by euphemistically disguising it as a stimulus package, increase taxes on producers and expand 'redistribution,' impose limitations on private executive salaries, empower labor unions, further nationalize public education with the leftist indoctrination agenda of the National Education Association, further open our borders, ratify the Kyoto climate change treaty, abandon Israel, retreat and surrender in Iraq, dramatically reduce the defense budget, possibly reinstate the draft in the name of racial equity, nationalize our private 401(k) funds, abuse governmental power to target and investigate dissent from ordinary 'Joes,' and implement the Fairness Doctrine to shut down political dissent from his talk-radio critics?

Is freedom of speech in Obama's lexicon?

"Obama has much to hide and is determined to do so. I reiterate: If he and his surrogates are willing to go the extreme measure of blunting the free speech of those who question and/or disagree with him – through the use of demagoguery and racial intimidation – in a vain attempt to win an election, what lengths will he and his minions employ to retain power?"

The Left's War on Truth

"On October 1, former Republican congressional candidate Tan Nguyen was indicted over his involvement in a letter that the California Coalition for Immigration Reform mailed to Latinos, warning them that they should not vote if they were illegal immigrants because ‘voting in a federal election is a crime that could result in jail time’ and for which they could be deported.'

"The Civil Rights Division of the DOJ looked upon this letter as an example of voter 'suppression.' Yet because the Civil Rights Division could not prosecute Nguyen over the exercise of free speech alone, they sent FBI agents to his door and intimidated him until he denied involvement with the letter. Then they were able to use his denial against him and indict him for obstruction of justice.

"Former ACLU attorney Mark Kappelhoff taught his underlings in the Civil Rights Division how to carry out such jack-boot measures in speeches he gave in various conferences, like a recent one where he spoke in a panel titled: 'Standing up Against Hate Speech.' In this conference Kappelhoff’s panel went beyond the tactics used against Nguyen and dealt instead with how the Civil Rights Division of the DOJ will have to defend legislation like the 'fairness doctrine,' should Obama win the election. The panel focused on the way an 'increasing number of radio and television stations and networks have allowed DJs, talk show hosts and their favorite organized hate groups to spew hatred of immigrants, gays, lesbians, and people of color over the public airwaves.'”

and

"Let’s face it. The Left hates Nguyen, Limbaugh, Joe the Plumber, and others like them, because they speak truth in a climate which the Left is crafting to deny the truth. By doing this, such men enter into the arena of ideas and challenge the worldview and mental constructs of the Left. In response, the Left denounces them for spewing hatred, or even worse, working in the plumbing trade without joining a union. And when these tactics don’t work, they resort to the gavel.

"Taken in total, these various assaults on the First Amendment remind us that we are up against people who want power at any price. And if the election of Obama allows individuals like Joyce and Kappelhoff to attain a level of power greater than they already possess, the exercise of rights such as those protected in the First Amendment will be integral to our defense of truth and of this nation."

Obama Moves to Silence All ACORN Critics

"The Obama campaign’s Stalinist-style demand that a special prosecutor at the Department of Justice criminally prosecute any candidates, party officials or congressmen who discussed their concerns over voter fraud is an outrageous attempt to use the power of the federal government to intimidate and persecute political opponents. It is almost as if Senator Obama wants to reinstitute the Alien and Sedition Acts and it brings into sharp focus the issue of whether he understands the protections of the First Amendment and the importance of fair and secure elections."

Tell Obama that if he needs a shredder to destroy the Constitution, buy a good one because our Constitution will not go down without a fight.

Will the neo-communists censor the Net?

Over my dead body and from my cold, dead hands will they pry my keyboard, my mouse, and freedom of speech from me.

Republican HQ Manager's Home Shot Up Over McCain Signs

A preview of coming events?:

"Coverely said it appears Democrats are becoming more aggressive in the county."

They are pissed

Hate speech hypocrisy

"The latest assault on the integrity of free speech is being perpetrated by Democrats in Congress who are thinking that they’ve found a loophole in their self-appointed role as champions of free speech. They appear to believe that labeling conservative speech as, 'messages of bigotry or hatred, creating a climate of fear and inciting individuals to commit hate crimes,' will then allow them to silence and infringe the speech of their political foes."

The Accusation Game

"It has long been a Democrat tactic to accuse Republicans of whatever unprincipled, illicit or deplorable act that they themselves are about to perpetrate. This tactic has been repeatedly employed with great success, and is about to pay off with the grand prize of the Presidency."

How the Dems Plan to SHUT UP THE RIGHT

"A (God Forbid) President Obama, will work with a Democratic congress to place even greater restrictions on the free speech of those who disagree with the liberal agenda."

Internet Censorship

"Lessig spoke at the Fortune’s Brainstorm Tech conference in Half Moon Bay, California, this year and he told the audience 'There’s going to be an i-9/11 event which will act as a catalyst for a radical reworking of the law pertaining to the internet.'

"He also claims that he spoke to the former government Counter Terrorism Czar Richard Clarke and he found out that the Justice Department was waiting for a cyber terrorism event that would be the catalyst for implemented the 'cyber equivalent' of the Patriot Act, to which Lessig nicknamed the i-Patriot Act."

What happens to the Internet Harpies if Obama wins the White House?

"Which raises an obvious question - if Obama wins the White House will the harpies he has unleashed still try to censor what is said about him out in hyperspace and is that what he really intends/condones?"

"Swift-boating" Obama? Sorry, but that ship has sailed

"Obama didn't go after Rush Limbaugh or Jerry Agar or Glenn Beck or Mark Levin or any number of other right-wing radio hosts (as featured in the terrific book Shock Jocks by my colleague Rory O'Connor). No, he went after WGN Radio's Milt Rosenberg -- a genial University of Chicago professor who for 35 years has hosted possibly the most civilized two hours of commercial radio anywhere in America, 'Extension 720.'"

and

"But as we now know, the Obama camp lied in its email when it claimed that WGN had refused to 'offer sane, honest rebuttal' to Kurtz. OK, so politicians lie, even "candidates of change" lie. But just as bad is the assertion that it was 'unacceptable' for WGN to use 'our public airwaves' to air the program. If ever there was a pre-announcement of how an Obama Administration would regulate 'our public airwaves,' that was it."

and

"Campaigning is not governance, and I must admit, I'm now a lot more worried than I was a month ago about how Obama will deal with criticism from the right should he be elected, because they ain't going away.

"Obama says he will change Washington. That he will govern in a bipartisan way and get Congress unstuck. I want to believe him. But I think that this current wave of criticism is practice for the years ahead, and I am not encouraged by the Obama campaign's instinct to dump a pile of bricks on anyone who won't engage them on their terms. I mean, wasn't one reason Democrats liked Obama was that he represented a break from the partisan rancor of the Clinton years?"

Is Freedom of Speech, age 221, in America in a coma in an Intensive Care Unit? Is the pulse fading? Should we call for a priest for Last Rites? Should we make funeral arraignments?

Is there a widow to send flowers to?

DEMS GET SET TO MUZZLE THE RIGHT

"Regrettably, media freedom hasn't been made an issue by the McCain campaign, perhaps because the maverick senator is himself no fan of unbridled political speech, as his long support of aggressive campaign-finance regulation underscores. But the threat to free speech is real - and profoundly disturbing."