PDA

View Full Version : Elections BARONE: The coming liberal thugocracy


mikey23545
10-14-2008, 04:35 AM
COMMENTARY:

"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 e-mails, did when conservative Stanley Kurtz appeared on Milt Rosenberg's WGN radio program in Chicago. Mr. Kurtz had been researching Mr. 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 e-mails. The message was clear to anyone who would follow Mr. 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 Mr. 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 Mr. Obama's ties to Mr. 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 Congressional Democrats sought to reimpose the "fairness doctrine" on broadcasters, which until it was repealed in the 1980s required equal time for different points of view.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.

To their credit, some liberal old-timers - like House Appropriations Chairman David Obey - voted against the "fairness doctrine," in line with their longstanding support of free speech. But you can expect the "fairness doctrine" to get another vote if Barack Obama wins and Democrats increase their congressional majorities.

Corporate liberals have done their share in shutting down anti-liberal speech, too. "Saturday Night Live" ran a spoof of the financial crisis that skewered Democrats like House Financial Services Chairman Barney Frank and liberal contributors Herbert and Marion Sandler, who sold toxic-waste-filled Golden West to Wachovia Bank for $24 billion. Kind of surprising, but not for long. The tape of the broadcast disappeared from NBC's Web site and was replaced with another that omitted the references to Mr. Frank and the Sandlers. Evidently NBC and its parent, General Electric, don't want people to hear speech that attacks liberals.

Then there's the Democrats' "card check" legislation that would abolish secret ballot elections in determining whether employees are represented by unions. The unions' strategy is obvious: Send a few thugs over to employees' homes - we know where you live - and get them to sign cards that will trigger a union victory without giving employers a chance to be heard.

Once upon a time, liberals prided themselves, with considerable reason, as the staunchest defenders of free speech. Union organizers in the 1930s and 1940s made the case that they should have access to employees to speak freely to them, and union leaders like George Meany and Walter Reuther were ardent defenders of the First Amendment.

Today's liberals seem to be taking their marching orders from other quarters. Specifically, from the college and university campuses where administrators, armed with speech codes, have for years been disciplining and subjecting to sensitivity training any students who dare to utter thoughts that liberals find offensive. The campuses that once prided themselves as zones of free expression are now the least free part of our society.

Obama supporters who found the campuses congenial and Mr. Obama himself, who has chosen to live all his adult life in university communities, seem to find it entirely natural to suppress speech they don't like and seem utterly oblivious to claims this violates the letter and spirit of the First Amendment. In this campaign, we have seen the coming of the Obama thugocracy, suppressing free speech, and we may see its flourishing in the four or eight years ahead.

Michael Barone is a nationally syndicated columnist.

http://washingtontimes.com/news/2008/oct/13/the-coming-thugocracy/print/

memyselfI
10-14-2008, 05:44 AM
I always figured my criticism of the government might land me in trouble with the authorities. NEVER in my wildest dreams did I imagine it might be under a 'liberal' administration. :shake:

Mecca
10-14-2008, 05:47 AM
You do know this has already been posted right....I mean it's really hard to look at the first page which it's still on.

nychief
10-14-2008, 05:47 AM
what a joke.

BucEyedPea
10-14-2008, 05:51 AM
I always figured my criticism of the government might land me in trouble with the authorities. NEVER in my wildest dreams did I imagine it might be under a 'liberal' administration. :shake:

I'm surprised at this too. I liked Obama on civil liberties but between caving on FISA, trying to arrest people for saying something negative or what he deems false and now this...is scarey!

memyselfI
10-14-2008, 06:28 AM
I'm surprised at this too. I liked Obama on civil liberties but between caving on FISA, trying to arrest people for saying something negative or what he deems false and now this...is scarey!

But then again, here at CP we have seen 'open minded liberals' go completely RWNJ over anyone who isn't drinking the Koolade. That after they blasted the CONS on the board for doing the same EXACT thing over the previous decade.

I guess anything is possible when you are drunk from Koolade, er power.

BucEyedPea
10-14-2008, 06:57 AM
But then again, here at CP we have seen 'open minded liberals' go completely RWNJ over anyone who isn't drinking the Koolade. That after they blasted the CONS on the board for doing the same EXACT thing over the previous decade.

I guess anything is possible when you are drunk from Koolade, er power.

I noticed that too. Some of them are worse than the righties. Never had to put a single lefty on ignore as I have now.
Wasn't here earlier but it was just as bad elsewhere.

jidar
10-14-2008, 07:08 AM
I'm surprised at this too. I liked Obama on civil liberties but between caving on FISA, trying to arrest people for saying something negative or what he deems false and now this...is scarey!

What does Obama have to do with people calling in to voice their displeasure over radio show interviews?

Also, I find this news article pretty silly. From what I can tell, both sides are pretty antagonistic towards each other. Conservatives have been known for having protestors arrested, and everything else.

There is a reason that liberals have this reputation for being all talk while conservatives are supposedly more practical and action oriented. To me I read this and think "wow, liberals actually will do something something. Unusual".

jidar
10-14-2008, 07:09 AM
I noticed that too. Some of them are worse than the righties. Never had to put a single lefty on ignore as I have now.
Wasn't here earlier but it was just as bad elsewhere.

You shouldn't confused debate in a public forum, no matter how nasty it gets, as some type of attack on free speech.

BucEyedPea
10-14-2008, 07:10 AM
You shouldn't confused debate in a public forum, no matter how nasty it gets, as some type of attack on free speech.
I didn't. I was referring to nastiness in tone and personal attacks.

BucEyedPea
10-14-2008, 07:13 AM
What does Obama have to do with people calling in to voice their displeasure over radio show interviews?

Also, I find this news article pretty silly. From what I can tell, both sides are pretty antagonistic towards each other. Conservatives have been known for having protestors arrested, and everything else.

There is a reason that liberals have this reputation for being all talk while conservatives are supposedly more practical and action oriented. To me I read this and think "wow, liberals actually will do something something. Unusual".

I was referring to Obama's attempt in MO to suppress political speech with arrests for what he'd consider false stories on him. I don't care who does it left or right. It's just not what a liberal usually stands for.

jidar
10-14-2008, 07:16 AM
I was referring to Obama's attempt in MO to suppress political speech with arrests for what he'd consider false stories on him. I don't care who does it left or right. It's just not what a liberal usually stands for.

It's sort of an odd thing, but it's true that liberals haven't been 100% in favor of free speech. Many on the left have done what they can to censor media, music and video games in particular.

The free speech issue really doesn't have a stalwart champion.

Mecca
10-14-2008, 07:20 AM
It's sort of an odd thing, but it's true that liberals haven't been 100% in favor of free speech. Many on the left have done what they can to censor media, music and video games in particular.

The free speech issue really doesn't have a stalwart champion.

Those are the "moderate liberals" who think we should be dictating a bunch of family values or some shit.

I hate censorship personally that is up to people personally to decide if they want to see it or not.

***SPRAYER
10-14-2008, 07:35 AM
Barney Frank = Ernst Rohm

Saggysack
10-14-2008, 07:37 AM
I always figured my criticism of the government might land me in trouble with the authorities. NEVER in my wildest dreams did I imagine it might be under a 'liberal' administration. :shake:

Don't worry. You aren't that important.

patteeu
10-14-2008, 08:02 AM
What does Obama have to do with people calling in to voice their displeasure over radio show interviews?

The calls were organized by Obama's Action Wire (http://my.barackobama.com/page/s/WGNstandards)

And this article (http://media.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZmRhYmE3NzFlMTljNTdmZGQ3MjhkYTVjNzdmMjVhMzE=) gives some examples of the Obama sheep who answered the call. There is a link to the interview podcast at the bottom of the page for those who would prefer to hear the nonsense first hand.

StcChief
10-14-2008, 11:15 AM
and as the yard signs disappear at night too..

dirk digler
10-14-2008, 11:20 AM
I'm surprised at this too. I liked Obama on civil liberties but between caving on FISA, trying to arrest people for saying something negative or what he deems false and now this...is scarey!

BEP IMHO the reason why the Obama campaign is doing this is to protect themselves from what happened to Kerry in 04 and also to fight all the smears that they encountered earlier this year with the viral emails. It maybe a little extreme but they are leaving nothing to chance.

Calcountry
10-14-2008, 11:46 AM
I noticed that too. Some of them are worse than the righties. Never had to put a single lefty on ignore as I have now.
Wasn't here earlier but it was just as bad elsewhere.But I got pretty close though, don't forget that.

But in the end, you couldn't, because you love me so much. ;)

Calcountry
10-14-2008, 11:47 AM
I was referring to Obama's attempt in MO to suppress political speech with arrests for what he'd consider false stories on him. I don't care who does it left or right. It's just not what a liberal usually stands for.Just wait until he shuts down Talk radio.

Calcountry
10-14-2008, 11:49 AM
BEP IMHO the reason why the Obama campaign is doing this is to protect themselves from what happened to Kerry in 04 and also to fight all the smears that they encountered earlier this year with the viral emails. It maybe a little extreme but they are leaving nothing to chance.Win at all costs, the ends justify the means. Yeah, we know about these kind.

Calcountry
10-14-2008, 11:50 AM
and as the yard signs disappear at night too..That is why you need to chain a pit bull with a McCain/ Palin doggie sweater out in the yard at night.

patteeu
10-14-2008, 12:14 PM
BEP IMHO the reason why the Obama campaign is doing this is to protect themselves from what happened to Kerry in 04 and also to fight all the smears that they encountered earlier this year with the viral emails. It maybe a little extreme but they are leaving nothing to chance.

In your opinion, is it a good idea to put people like this in charge of enforcing a new Fairness Doctrine? :shrug:

Garcia Bronco
10-14-2008, 12:55 PM
I do not support slander of any kind, and if people are slandering Obama, McCain, or anyone then I support the use of legal means to go after these people.

StcChief
10-14-2008, 01:01 PM
That is why you need to chain a pit bull with a McCain/ Palin doggie sweater out in the yard at night.bear traps and spike strips..... The "no trespessing" signs don't do much.

patteeu
10-14-2008, 01:29 PM
I do not support slander of any kind, and if people are slandering Obama, McCain, or anyone then I support the use of legal means to go after these people.

Yeah, but has there been any serious allegation of slander in this campaign in your opinion?

***SPRAYER
10-14-2008, 01:43 PM
http://www.neverfindout.org/

Let's never find out!

BucEyedPea
10-14-2008, 02:14 PM
I do not support slander of any kind, and if people are slandering Obama, McCain, or anyone then I support the use of legal means to go after these people.

The standard is not the same for a public figure and even for a private person it's tough to prove in this country. I believe it's a civil matter and not a criminal one. So he can sue instead of using cops to arrest people with police state tactics. He can also use his own speech to speak over it and defend himself. In politics some of these things are opinions.

whoman69
10-14-2008, 05:22 PM
Win at all costs, the ends justify the means. Yeah, we know about these kind.

Yeah, we just had eight years of that.

Democrats have seen what Republicans will do to win an election. McCain learned from his loss in 2000 how to win this way. I think you're just angry that democrats are not going to roll over like sheep again. Hardly thuggery.

Where was the outrage in 2000 when Republicans stormed places where they were trying to do a recount so that the vote could not go through?