Don't Think Our Constitutional Rights Will Be Taken?
April 17th 2009 19:28
They are certainly trying. Read the following articles and postings and decide for yourself. Only three months into office and this stuff is conveniently released just before the tea parties . . . .
A good start and you might want to click and read some of the links in the post.
DHS is even being sued.
Or a journalist being arrested for covering Katie Couric's award ceremony without the right opinion on the award. Yeah, USC is so getting sued. Yes, it was private property, USC is not a state school, but the irony is still SO HEAVY and the acts are scary.
And then there are state schools crushing free speech they don't agree with.
Combine this with taking away the right of doctors and others from refusing to perform abortions or other procedures based on religious beliefes.
But what do you expect from a President that wants to stop waterboarding (a practice demonstrators have even done during their protests, to no permanent harm) people caught in terrorist camps with weapons and ammunition and the goal of killing thousands of Americans, but is all for viable babies within days or weeks of birth having their heads partially delivered, skulls punctured and brains sucked out. Makes sense, doesn't it?
You can support my blogging even more by buying my book at Author House. Unlike liberals, this is the only fantasy world I live in
A good start and you might want to click and read some of the links in the post.
DHS is even being sued.
Or a journalist being arrested for covering Katie Couric's award ceremony without the right opinion on the award. Yeah, USC is so getting sued. Yes, it was private property, USC is not a state school, but the irony is still SO HEAVY and the acts are scary.
And then there are state schools crushing free speech they don't agree with.
Combine this with taking away the right of doctors and others from refusing to perform abortions or other procedures based on religious beliefes.
But what do you expect from a President that wants to stop waterboarding (a practice demonstrators have even done during their protests, to no permanent harm) people caught in terrorist camps with weapons and ammunition and the goal of killing thousands of Americans, but is all for viable babies within days or weeks of birth having their heads partially delivered, skulls punctured and brains sucked out. Makes sense, doesn't it?
You can support my blogging even more by buying my book at Author House. Unlike liberals, this is the only fantasy world I live in
| 97 |
| Vote |
Comment by S.L.
The Political Brief
Comment by Morgan Bell
Science News
Deep Pencil
Business News
Movie Train
Artist Quirk
i remember something very similar happening with a college kid (i think in Florida) getting tasered for asking John Kerry a question, do you remember the "Dont Taze Me Bro" video? and that was way before Obama
dont get me wrong, i think both incidents are equally ludicrous, but i think maybe security staff in your country have these over-reactions because they get a bit jittery about concealed weapons etc
Comment by Jonathan Biviano
Politics Realm
Marriage Bits
The tazer incident was wrong too, but again, it was a conservative trying to ask a liberal a question. Can't have any of that now, can we!
My brother insists that nobody is going to take away our rights, but these are scary indicators that he might be wrong.
Comment by Alexander Cekala
History
Is It True? A Deeper Look Into Conspiracy Theories
Chump Change Beginers Guide To Making Money Online
Heretic Hunters
Comment by Andrew Biviano
The Middle Ground
Next, the DHS report says this:
I'm sorry, I have to say it. Only a very dim-witted person could sincerely believe that this statement means that everyone who opposed abortion or immigration is a terrorist or a hate group. It states that a hate group MAY be based on any number of things, including opposition to immigration or abortion. Haven't you heard of the hate groups that go around killing anyone who looks Mexican, or who bomb or murder Planned Parenthood doctors? It doesn't say that everyone who holds these beliefs belongs to a hate group, only that hate groups could be based on these beliefs. It's like one of the easier SAT questions that tested your ability to reason: "Boys may have brown hair. Suzie has brown hair. Does this mean Suzie is a boy?"
I don't think people are actually that dumb; they know exactly what they are doing: misleading people to try and create controversy where there is none and dishonestly vilify their political adversaries. If the report had mentioned that extremists may be motivated by a single issue such as environmental protection (eco-terrorists), would you have read it as saying that all Prius owners are terrorists? Come on, you should be above this.
Comment by S.L.
The Political Brief
Comment by Andrew Biviano
The Middle Ground
S.L., do you remember when Hillary Clinton made the "vast right wing conspiracy" comment? How crazy and paranoid she looked? How everything else she said in that interview and for several years afterward was dismissed and forgotten by most people as the unreliable ramblings of a paranoid conspiracy theorist?
Well, your "boundless evil" comment and other conspiracy theories have the same effect. You call the DHS report, which was poorly phrased at worst, and cleared up right away, as an example of "evil?" You have even included in your conspiracy theory the most successful thing Obama has done (saving the captain from pirates), saying he didn't make the decisions the right way while lacking any knowledge of how he made the decision (even though you say your blog is based on facts). I've also seen you refer to Obama as an "illegal alien" in a comment on this blog. What? I haven't even heard this from the most extreme fringe, who only go so far as to says he's not a natural citizen.
Jon (along with the hyper-partisan blogs he links to for proof) is fashioning a theory that there is conspiracy to deprive you of your constitutional rights out of a misinterpreted sentence in a footnote in a report likely written by a low level career bureaucrat who may be a Republican for all we know, which was then promptly clarified as soon as it was brought to the Secretary's attention. He also offers as evidence of a government conspiracy the actions of private security guards removing someone from a private function on private property because he was admittedly there to challenge and annoy the guests. For his "proof' that the man who managed to rise to the presidency is an idiot he points to teleprompter gaffes, less-than-great gifts, and a lack of bowing prowess. And when called out on these statements, all he does is point out that zealots on the left do the same thing.
I know that this ridiculousness isn't doing any real harm because not a lot of people read these blogs and those who do understand the bias of the writer. But sometimes it becomes so ludicrous that someone has to call foul.
Comment by S.L.
The Political Brief
Boundless evil is a good term for whole-sale slaughter of innocents, which the Democrats not only support but celebrate. It's a clear definition of the racism they practice under the guise of "tolerance", too. And the re-writing of history to fit the needs of their socialist agenda is nothing short of evil. Removing God from the public view and saying that we are not a Christian country is evil as well. Changing words to try to make the world (or the country or the situation) seem different than it is, is evil, too, Andrew. Janet Napolitano was too stupid to acknowledge the drug wars and terrorism and illegal alien problems in her own state so she's now in a position to deny it for the whole country and you don't find that evil?
As for B.O. (B.S.) being an illegal alien, those are his own words, not mine. I realize that he's an accomplished liar, but if you don't believe him when he says he was legally adopted by Mr. Soetero and made a Muslim citizen of Indonesia, how can you believe anything else he says? He refuses to show a birth certificate or any proof that his adoption was made null and void at any point. That makes him an illegal alien. We won't even go into where he was born, since he is obviously afraid to produce a real birth certificate.
One of us is being played for a fool Andrew. It's not me.
Comment by Andrew Biviano
The Middle Ground
But your views on Obama are assertions of fact, which are simply false. First, you should notice that you are not basing your factual assertions on evidence, but rather the alleged lack of evidence disproving it. You don't have any documents establishing a different citizenship than Obama claims. Thus, you have only a theory.
And your theory has been thoroughly disproved already. This link is not to MSNBC or NPR, it is Snopes.com, recognized as a leading source of myth debunking. It points out that the certificate offered has been vouched for by everyone necessary, and is corroborated by the two birth announcements that appeared in Hawaii newspapers. Your theory has not even been accepted by FNC or the GOP leadership. Every court has rejected it flatly, including the conservative leaning Supreme Court. There is nothing left to debate.
Second, your theory that he became an illegal alien by being adopted is wrong on several levels. Perhaps you would feel better if you ask an attorney or researched yourself what the law is in this area. Your research would tell you that even if it did happen as you allege, one does not lose his American citizenship by being adopted by a non-American. Perhaps he could have gotten dual citizenship if they had applied for it; we'd need to see records of that to make sure. But in order to lose US citizenship it needs to be formally renounced. This is something a kid wouldn't do, nor want to do, particularly with an American mother. And again, there would be a documentary record of this that no one has produced.
He was born in the United States to an American mother. This is enough. That's the law.
I'm curious if I'm the only one "being played for a fool," as you suggest. Jon, do you also believe that Obama is an illegal alien?
Comment by S.L.
The Political Brief
Also, I can speak with some degree of authority on the subject of adoption. I was adopted and several of my relatives were, as well. Once the adoption is final, you become 100% the adoptive family member, your birth rights are gone and you have no claim on the birth parents or their nationality. So Barry Soetero is NOT an American citizen, but an Indonesian citizen. Since his mother never went to court to change it, he is NOT an American. If she did change his citizenship, lets see some certified documentation.
I'm acting on facts, Andrew, you're the one who is playing with a fantasy of B.O. (B.S.) being an American.
Comment by Andrew Biviano
The Middle Ground
It is different perhaps when are adopted into an entirely new family. Regardless of whether Mr. Soetoro adopted him, his American mother never gave up custody of him. A new dad does not cancel out his mom. Adding is not subtracting in this case.
If am in in fantasy land, than so is 99.9% of the world. Is it really more likely that this is as obvious as you suggest, and yet the entire GOP, conservative mainstream media, and judiciary failed to notice?
Comment by S.L.
The Political Brief
In case you haven't noticed, Andrew, the whole world has been kissing his... ring... in hopes of appearing to be "tolerant" and "non racist" instead of concentrating on his terribly flawed "policies."
Comment by Andrew Biviano
The Middle Ground
Maybe if you were to hear it from an ally, someone whose views you respect? What do you say, Jon -- care to set the record straight? Do you also think our president is an illegal alien, or are you living in my fantasy land? I know you run the risk of contradicting one of your biggest supporters, but you also have a chance to demonstrate your credibility.
S.L., I regret my role in starting this back and forth, as there is clearly no point in it. I think we've reached a good stopping point, so I'm going to call it quits. Best wishes, and God bless.
Comment by Jonathan Biviano
Politics Realm
Marriage Bits
HOWEVER, it's immaterial. He's president now and destroying our country so he can "remake" it. Remake is his word. He's running around the world apologizing for America, the country that's been the biggest force for good ever in history.
Now he's telling banks that they can't pay back their TARP money, they have to give the government common stock in exchange for it. What's the difference? If the banks can pay back in cash, they get out from under all control. Paying back in stock puts the government on the board and in the shareholder meetings. That is just plain wrong!
The DHS report is extremely wrong. It gives NO SPECIFIC DATA on which groups we have to worry about or that their numbers have been growing. It's all conjecture and broad accusations made against people with opposition to abortion or immigration. Napolitano made it worse by going on TV and saying that vets are just too stupid to avoid becoming caught up in the extremism. THE CIVIL LIBERTIES LAWYERS AT DHS SAID IT SHOULD NOT BE RELEASED. Veterans go to war with a better understanding of what this country stands for than she does and provides its citizens with an oath to protect its constitution. To insult them this way is outrageous.
As far as hotair being partisan, yes, they are conservative. That does not make them wrong. That logic is why so much of the country is split. I just hope that the majority of the country doesn't wait to see conservatives interned like WWII Japanese, by Democrats then too, before they realize the dangers here. Refusing to acknowledge the wrongness of putting out a report generalizing people who have conservative or federalist views as potential right-wing extremists, with no data to back it up except for ONE MAN, is partisan blindness. When will you stand up for me and S.L., Andrew? Can Obama and his administration do no wrong in your eyes or is that you just want to be argumentative? I was here on this blog slamming George Bush for the TARP and the other bailouts. I've criticized GOP for their spending.
It only takes "Civil Unrest" to suspend the Constitution, per laws passed to respond to a nuclear war and the ensuing chaos. If the tea parties and their message "Of get your budgetary house in order" continue to get ignored, if "amnesty" is pushed through despite 75% of the country objecting to it and it's effect on unemployment rates, if our military and conservatives continue to gets demonized, could we get "Civil Unrest"? Absolutely.
What do I want? I want Obama to come out and go on the MSM and destroy this DHS report. I want him to publicly chastise and fire Napolitano. It won't matter long term because he's got other people as radical as her to follow.
Napolitano was governor of Arizona. Phoenix has the SECOND HIGHEST rate of kidnapping in THE WORLD! That's right, the world! Yet, she had the cajones to say that there's no border problem, before having to acknowledge there is and send more help. While governor she cut the budget of the immigration enforcement agency, then when a convicted illegal immigrant, who was not sent back because of that budget cut, rear ended a parked highway patrolman and killed him, she blamed and sued Ford!
When liberals are demonizing people exercising their constitutional rights by calling them "tea baggers" and "corporate stooges," instead of acknowledging their positions are valid even if they disagree with them, and you combine this report and the FACT that outside of Fox News the major media is complicit in the razzle-dazzle-don't-look-at-w hat's-really-happening" propaganda, yeah, I'm genuinely concerned. We're making nice with dictators, and telling people not to listen to Rush Limbaugh. We're offering to negotiate with brutal men that terroize their people and threaten to wipe out their neighbors, but when Republicans ask for a seat at the table they are told "We Won."
It's not a partisan thing. It's an American thing. George Bush and the GOP put on this road. Obama is stepping on the accelerator, and until liberals put aside their emotional, ideological blinders and look where we're going, we'll hurtle down it. I don't think we'll hurtle down it until we're killing people in concentration camps, but America will never look the same. When Obama titles speeches "A New Foundation" and says he will "remake America" (not rebuild, which would imply we're overall a good nation) over and over again, we should all be concerned.
Comment by S.L.
The Political Brief
Comment by Jonathan Biviano
Politics Realm
Marriage Bits
At this point, as I said, it doesn't matter as much as stopping Obama's agenda to "remake" America. The SCOTUS clearly doesn't care about hearing it and there are so many other ways Republican and Democratic Congresses have been stepping on the constitution, particularly in regards to "what is not GIVEN to the federal government is the purview of the states" (paraphrased), that is what we need to get out from under first.
We now face Fedzilla, and we need to shrink it back down to size.
Comment by Jonathan Biviano
Politics Realm
Marriage Bits
Excuse me? That killed fewer people than the carpet bombing of Dresden, but you didn't see that carpet bombing ending WWII did it? Many, many historians say that Japan would not have have surrendered until the US military stood on the doorstep of the Emperor's palace and hundreds of thousands more soldiers and civilians would have died before the end if not for us showing the balance of power had so drastically tipped. Heck, they didn't even surrender after the first bomb, they kept fighting on.
America's intentions are almost always good, though we make mistakes. We are run by humans. However, no country in history has spilled more blood or given more money or given more people to the protection of human rights, brought about the defeat of genocidal dictators (Saddam included), and the spread of democracy and freedom in the world than the USA.
No country gives it's people more opportunity to improve their circumstances WITHOUT GOVERNMENT HELP. The irony in Obama's ideology is that he's one of those people that made it without help, as is his wife. He and Michelle became millionaires having been raised by parents and grandparents who worked hard to provide for them without government help, yet they somehow think that other people are incapable of it.
No other economic system but free-market capitalism gives people the opportunity to improve their circumstances through hard work and determination. EVERY economic system has poor people, yet every system besides capitalism has only rich political classes, while everybody else is poor with no chance unless they become politicians. Every person Obama associated with before he became a US Senator is a Marxist. Does that automatically make him a Marxist? No, but show me somebody that he was friends with that isn't one. His mentor as a teenager was the leader of Hawaii's communist party. His roommate at Columbia was a marxist, as would most have his professors have been. Everybody who chose him for positions or to forward his career were marxists, like Bill Ayers.
If you can find people who played a role in his life who believed in the goodness of America and the empowering nature of capitalism, I'll be a little less concerned. So far, his appointees and the moves of his Treasury Secretary and his allies in Congress show little faith in us or the system.
Oh, and Axelrod says the tea parties are "unhealthy", because they could lead to violence! Can you imagine Karl Rove saying the same thing about anti-war protests, which actually did lead to violence against police trying to stop the looting and smashing of cars? In other words, conservatives should just shut up before people get angry or something.
Comment by Andrew Biviano
The Middle Ground
I know that you know for a fact that if our single mother had remarried someone from another country we would not have suddenly lost our American citizenship. You know that our sister remained Vietnamese even after she was adopted by two Americans. I know that you find Snopes.com reliable most of the time, as you have cited it to me on a couple occasions, and that the verification it describes is enough to put this issue to rest. In short, you know that our president is not an illegal alien. Yet, three times now your biggest fan has made these assertions on your blog and twice you have been asked to comment, but you refuse to simply respectfully state that she is factually incorrect. You are basically vouching for this misstatement.
Why does it matter? True, it doesn’t matter politically because it’s a resolved issue. It matters because it exposes your complete lack of factual credibility. If you won’t even concede that down is not up, because someone on your side says it is, why should anyone believe anything else you say?
And then you only make matters worse by proceeding to regurgitate the same mistruths that Hot Air brings you. Napolitano did not “say” that vets are stupid. You have only inferred (big difference) something she did not actually say, as nowhere in her interview did she ever actual mention intelligence.
And in reality, it is painfully obvious that you are once again misrepresenting what she said. She said that law enforcement has observed that certain paramilitary hate groups are on the lookout for and may make overtures to disgruntled and like-minded former servicemen because they have valuable combat training. This is a fact worth noting in a report directed to other law enforcement agencies who are tasked to protect us from violence by keeping an eye out for hate groups of all stripes. She did not say that veterans would be any more susceptible to these overtures than anyone else would, which is the only way she could have implied a lower intelligence. Rather, she simply said they were more likely to be approached.
Similarly, Axelrod did not say that the tea parties could lead to violence. Watch the clip. He used the word “unhealthy” but NEVER mentioned or implied violence or anything close to it. Even the Hot Air writer never mentioned violence in the link you use. To say that “Axelrod says the tea parties are ‘unhealthy,’ because they could lead to violence ” is either ignorance or a straight up lie.
Comment by Jonathan Biviano
Politics Realm
Marriage Bits
For me it's not about the adoption in Indonesia. It's about whether he was born in the US, and for now I'm letting it go, because it's not productive. There are too many other paths. Getting rid of the Dem congress in 2010 and rid of Obama in 2012 is remedy enough for me. If history proves it one way or the other, than history will have spoken. The Democrats are doing far more harm now with their statist budgets and spending than not properly vetting Obama.
And you passed my test. I posted what I did about Axelrod to see if you actually bothered to watch what I posted. It is funny though how dissent is 'patriotic' when liberals do it, and 'unhealthy' when conservatives to it, don't you think? And Allahpundit does say:
And it just amazes me, and Axelrod says it again, that he can't understand why we would be protesting a 10% increase in spending, the stimulus bill and the bailouts because 95% of us just got a tax break. Excuse me? A taxable $400 credit spread out over 9 months is supposed to buy away my principles? Conservative principles are not for sale for a taxable credit, or any amount of government bribery for that matter. The CNN reporter at the Chicago tea party tried hard to make that argument as well, that because we got a $400 tax credit, we shouldn't be out protesting the spending and waste . . . 57 Million people voted against Obama because they cared more about controlling the size of government than getting a "tax break." Oh, and if you're a poor or middle class smoker, that $13 a week isn't going to cover the new taxes on cigarettes . . .
Comment by Andrew Biviano
The Middle Ground
Oh, and in case you happen to be interested in what the law written by Congress is, as opposed to the law you wrote yourself, the statue is 8 U.S.C. section 1401. Obama is a natural citizen under subsection (a) if one believes what you call "fantasy land," and would also be deemed a natural citizen under section (g) if one subscribes to your theory that he was born in Kenya, since his mother was American and had lived in the U.S. for at least five years. No statute exists that says that a child loses his American citizenship if his American parent marries a foreigner. It sucks that the law is actually written down and verifiable, huh?
And Jon, I have not dodged any direct questions you posed me. In response to your current question as to when I would speak out against Obama for demonizing conservatives, my answer is right after he does so. But thus far, you have not presented anything that Obama has done to demonize anybody. Your evidence only involves things other people have said or done. Some of these people don't even work for the government. And as already proven, the inflammatory statements you get so worked up about are imaginary. Show me something that doesn't involve you completely misquoting and mischaracterizing someone, and we'll talk.
Comment by S.L.
The Political Brief
Comment by Jonathan Biviano
Politics Realm
Marriage Bits
Obama to GOP Congresspeople: "Don't listen to Rush Limbaugh."
Obama to Rahm and other White House officials: "Demonize Rush Limbaugh in the media and keep up the attack."
There's proof he authorized and encouraged the attempts to marginalize Rush. It backfired as Rush's audience grew by at least 10% because of the attention.
Silence also speaks volumes. Direct appointees and associates of Obama have been demonizing conservatives, not just in this DHS report, like Axelrod calling the tea parties "unhealthy" instead of "dissent is patriotic," yet he has not come out against the statements or reports. If you allow the people who work for you to demonize the people or actions that are constitutional without rebuke, you effectively condone it.
Comment by Andrew Biviano
The Middle Ground
And the people you are attacking aren't allowed a rebuttal? After Rush says he wants the president to fail, the president can't say "don't listen to that guy?" That's all he said! He didn't call him un-American or unpatriotic (as was used against war protesters) or call him an idiot. He just said he was wrong and was taking an unhelpful approach. And you seriously call that demonizing? Axelrod can't say that he thinks that protests based on inaccurate claims are unhealthy? Neither made any suggestion that others shouldn't be allowed to speak, they simply argued that their opinions were misguided. That's called democracy.
Have you truly forgotten how debate works? Both sides are allowed to argue. Remember when Moveon.org came out with the General Patraeus attack ad? Do you remember the reaction, in which the white house and dozens of members of congress loudly condemned it? Was that unconsitutional, or demonizing, or anything at all wrong? No, it was simply the rebuttal to a pretty inflammatory statement, words fought with words. Nothing was wrong with conservatives responding to attacks when they were in power and nothing is wrong now.
Again, you need to get some perspective. It's not demonizing to engage in a war of words and ideas. Both sides use offense as the best defense. If you read history books, you would see that this is nothing compared to what we used to have when the country started. AND IT"S JUST WORDS! No one has been charged with anything or censored one bit.
In the past I have commented on the harsh and beligerent tone of your posts, saying they're unproductive, but you have obviously disagreed since you continue the same approach. I suspect that you, like Rush, enjoy the response you get, otherwise neither of you would have entered the public domain and starting taking shots at everyone. Heck, I obviously get some enjoyment too, since I am now blogging regularly. Until you are ready to tone down your own rhetoric, it is truly wussy to complain about receiving what you dish out.