Barack Obama: Thin-Skinned And Easily Hurt

Let’s think back a few short years ago and remember all the nasty, vile things that were said publically about George W. Bush. All of them were infantile insults and many of the people who uttered them are today invited to be guest speakers at colleges, universities and political events around the United States. Even today, Sarah Palin is to target of a great deal of irrational hatred from the peace-loving and tolerant left. (Note the sarcasm of those last five words.)

So, what happens when Barack Obama is on the receiving end of a few criticisms? Well, first he complains that people are talking about him “like a dog.” But then check out what happens if someone writes a private note with an insult or criticism:

Luke Angel, 17, sent an angry email to the White House after watching a documentary about the September 11 attacks while drunk.

The FBI intercepted the email and contacted police in his home town of Silsoe, Bedfordshire.

Mr Angel has now been placed on a list of people banned from entering the US.

Mr Angel told the Bedfordshire On Sunday newspaper that he was unconcerned about the ban.

“I don’t really care. My parents aren’t very happy about it,” the paper quoted Mr Angel as saying.

“The police who came round took my picture and told me I was banned from America forever.”

Mr Angel told the newspaper he had called Mr Obama a “prick”, but he could not remember exactly what he had written because he was “drunk and high”.

A “prick.” During the 2008 election, Democrats were wearing tee-shirts that read: “Sarah Palin is a cunt.” None of them ever had any law-enforcement people come after them.

And neither Sarah Palin nor President Bush ever uttered one single word of complaint about any of it.

But a 17-year-old gets banned from the U.S, for hurting Obama’s feelings?

Barack Obama needs to grow up and put on his big-boy shorts. The Democrats need a consistent set of standards too.

Teen banned from US for insulting Obama
ABC News
September 14, 2010

Riot Police Called Out Against Senior Citizen Tea Party

So, we can’t secure the border but we can call out the SWAT team against unarmed grandparents? Who is the numb-nuts at the Secret Service that decided to squander taxpayer money this way? I think that person should have the cost of this ridiculous use of law enforcement assets taken out of their paycheck.

You can see more photos and video and read about this idiocy here:

TEAM OBAMA CALLS IN SWAT TEAM ON TEA PARTY PATRIOTS!
Gateway Pundit
April 28, 2010

Obama Administration Tramples On First Amendment: Issues Gag Order To Insurance Companies

I got laid off from my job last Wednesday and have been busy doing things like getting doctor appointments for my family before my medical benefits run out at the end of the month as well as trying to find a new job with benefits so that I don’t have to come up with a way of paying off a $1200/month COBRA payment on limited income.

Anyway, I know I’ve missed a few pretty big news stories since then, but I will try to get them in here as soon as possible.

Right now, I’d like to look at the latest action by the Obama administration. As I recall, Obama said he wanted a good debate about health care reform. If so, then why is he trying to silence those who want to get good infomation out to the people that will be most affected by it?

From the Washington Post:

The federal government has ordered health insurers to stop telling Medicare beneficiaries that proposed health reform legislation could hurt seniors and jeopardize their benefits.

The government might take enforcement action against insurers that have tried to mobilize opposition to the legislation by sending their enrollees “misleading and confusing” messages, a senior official of the Department of Health and Human Services said in a memo Monday.

The “messages” in question very correctly note that under HR3200, Medicare benefits to seniors will be reduced. Obama and the Democrats have already publically admitted this in their attempt to show that socialized medicine will not add to the defecit.

So, why the gag order? Why worry about the insuarance companies repeating exactly what Obama and the Democrats have already said?

Proposed health reform legislation would sharply reduce funding for Medicare Advantage plans, and the insurance industry has been battling to prevent that from happening. The bill unveiled last week by Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.), chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, would directly cut payments to Medicare Advantage plans by an estimated $123 billion over 10 years, and it would indirectly reduce funding for those plans by another $15.6 billion, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

And Obama does not want people to know about this? This leads to an even bigger question. Why stifle the debate? Why suppress the very same information that Obama and the Dems have publically acknowledged?

Unless the ultimate goal is to control the debate by controlling the information, nothing else makes sense.

You can access the complete article on-line here:

Insurers Criticize Administration ‘Gag Order’
David S. Hilzenrath
Washington Post
September 22, 2009

New State Sovereignty Movement Mobilizing

The tea parties were only the beginning, it seems. Now, state governments are stepping up and showing that they can hear the voices of the people, especially the voices of the Forgotten Man.

Consider the following:

“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

If you went to elementary school back in the 1970’s, like I did, then you will recognize from your 4th grade history lessons the words of the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the Unites States of America.

Apparently, not everyone learned that lesson or their teachers failed to teach it. Whichever it is, several states are forcing that lesson back to the national forefront.

Henry Lamb wrote the following for Right Side News:

Nowhere among the enumerated powers is there authority for the federal government to be in the mortgage loan business – as in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Nowhere is there authority for the federal government to be in the banking, or insurance business – as in Citibank, and AIG. Nowhere is there authority for the federal government to be in the health care business, or the animal identification business, or in the energy business, or in most of the places where the federal government is now flexing its regulatory muscles.

Many states are trying to remind the Democrat-controlled Congress and President Obama (a lawyer who should understand the Constitution) of this very thing.

Oklahoma said it very plainly and unambiguously in their resolution of sovereignty:

“…the State of Oklahoma hereby claims sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not otherwise enumerated and granted to the federal government by the Constitution of the United States.”

So far, 21 states have passed similar resolutions or are planning to. Among those states are Washington, Minnesota and Michigan, none of which is a Republican stronghold. This indicates that this is not a left vs. right or Democrat vs. Republican issue. It is a people vs. the government issue.

The Federal government would do well to pay attention to what is happening. They ignore this issue and the tea parties at their own peril. Likewise if they continue to ignore the Forgotten Man.

You can access the complete column on-line here:

New State Sovereignty Movement Mobilizing
Henry Lamb
Right Side News
May 9, 2009

Janeane Garofalo: Air-Headed Race Baiting From An Air-Head

Note the following photographs:

teaparty0001

teaparty0003

And then read what Jeaneane Garofalo had to say:

“Let’s be very honest about what this is about,” actress/comedian Janeane Garofalo said on Keith Olbermann’s MSNBC show. “It’s not about bashing Democrats. It’s not about taxes. They have no idea what the Boston Tea Party was about. They don’t know their history at all. This is about hating a black man in the White House. This is racism straight up. That is nothing but a bunch of tea-bagging rednecks.”

Fisrt, she should read a good history book to learn what the Boston Tea Party was about. (Hint: It was about taxes.)

But, I’m sure the couple in the following photograph would have a few things to say in response to her unfounded and irresponsible claim of racism:

img_0396

Maryland National Guard Issues Warning About TEA Party Protestors

The Obama administration has come forward and said that they do not want Islamic terrorists to be called “terrorists” and that we should listen and learn in an effort to better understand them.

But this same administration regards all those who disagree with it’s policies as “potential terrorists.” The administration has yet to distance itself from a DHS report that regarded all Veterans as potential right-wing extremists.

What’s wrong with this picture?

Why does Obama have such harsh words for peaceful, freedom loving Americans and then sits down and politiely listens to thugs and tyrants like Daniel Ortega and Hugo Chavez as they insult and demean the United States of America?

One year ago, I could not even imagine that our own government would turn on us like this. Today, it infuriates me that this has become reality.

Read the following excerpt from David Noss at Southern Maryland Online:

A document issued by the Maryland National Guard on April 9 warns full-time Guard personnel to be aware of threats from local citizens protesting income taxes during grass roots events known as TEA (Taxed Enough Already) Parties — one of which was held on Solomons Island March 22. The Guard document, “Planned TEA Party Protests (FPCON Advisory 09-004),” was believed to have first been revealed by a blog called The Jawa Report. A call today to Col. Kohler, Md. National Guard Public Affairs in Baltimore, confirmed the authenticity of the document. The document was officially classified as UNCLASSIFIED/FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY (U/FOUO).

The Guard document follows closely on the heels of a Dept. of Homeland Security document, released on April 7 that profiles American citizens who are concerned about gun rights and the “current economic and political climate” as potential rightwing extremists and domestic terrorists. The document is titled “Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment” and was recently profiled in a Washington Times article.

Yet another Homeland Security document from the Missouri Information Analysis Center (MIAC), leaked to the press in March, profiles vocal supporters of Ron Paul, Bob Barr and Chuck Baldwin as potential domestic terrorists. The so-called MIAC document also cautions police to be aware of citizens carrying a copy of the U.S. Constitution, labeling the document as “political paraphernalia.”

The Constitution is “politcal paraphernalia?” who the hell came up with that analysis? Josef Stalin?

So, what were the orders from the government to the Maryland National Guard regarding the TEA Parties held on April 15?

Read on:

HEADQUARTERS, MARYLAND ARMY NATIONAL GUARD
13620 Meuse Argonne Circle
Camp Fretterd Military Reservation
Reisterstown, Maryland 21136

JFHQ-MDARNG-G3 9 April 2009

MEMORANDUM FOR SEE DISTRIBUTION

SUBJECT: Planned TEA Party Protests (FPCON Advisory 09-004)

1. (U) This Maryland Army National Guard (MDARNG) Force Protection advisory is in response to a nationwide planned protest activities scheduled for April 15, 2009. Although there is no known direct threat to MDNG facilities and MDNG members, they may become a target of opportunity during plan protest activities throughout Maryland.

2. (U) FORCE PROTECTION CONDITIONS.

a. (U) USNORTHCOM FPCON baseline for the continental United States, Alaska, and Canada remains unchanged at ALPHA.

b. (U) MDARNG is not recommending a FPCON baseline change at this time.

3. (U//FOUO) SITUATION: Numerous entities have formed recently to express displeasure/anger over recent federal/state government actions: more taxes, increased spending, higher deficits, a surge of borrowing to pay for it all, bailout of the financial institutions, and etc. This movement can be identified by different variations of “TEA Party” or “Tea Party.” Past “TEA Party” events have been peaceful. There was a “Tea party” event at Solomons, Maryland, on March 22, 2009. “TEA” stands for “Taxed Enough Already.”

4. (U) KNOWN LOCATIONS AND EVENTS: According various websites and open source information, planned protest locations and time on April 15 in Maryland are:

*Annapolis, 12:00 pm – 2:00 pm, Campbell Park (Dock/Boardwalk), Annapolis Harbor

*Baltimore, 3:00 pm – 5:00 pm, The Inner Harbor

*Bel Air, 12:00 pm, Bel Air Courthouse Plaza on Main Street

*Cecil County, 4:00 pm – 6:00 pm, Elkton Christian Academy, 144 Appleton Road

*Frederick, 3:00 pm, City Hall then march to Winchester Hall

*Cumberland, 12:00 pm, Baltimore and Mechanic Streets

*Havre de Grace, 4:00 pm – 6:00 pm, Tydings Park Gazebo

*Salisbury, 4:30 pm – 6:30 pm, Downtown Salisbury

*Westminster, 6:30 pm, Legends Cafe off of Route 140 in Westminster

*Washington DC, 12:00pm-2:00pm, US Treasury Department – National Stage; 11:00am-3:00pm Lafayette Park – Grassroots Stage (not MD)

5. (U) FORCE PROTECTION RECOMMENDATIONS:

a. (U) Full-time personnel (i.e. armories) and recruiters need to be aware their surroundings. Contact local law enforcement when feel threaten by protesters or protesters trespass into MDNG property.

b. (U//FOUO) Commanders at all levels should establish relationship with local police in order to understand the local threats. Keep family members informed. Talk to other service personnel to share information. Practice OPSEC. Don’t provide personal information to anyone you don’t know. Avoid high risk areas.

c. (U//FOUO) Commanders are encouraged to update alert rosters and review emergency evacuation plans/rally points. Ensure all facilities have emergency phone lists posted (i.e. FBI, FIRE, POLICE, HOSPITALS, EMS, ETC…). Be aware of and avoid local protests. Report all potential protest activities to your next higher headquarters.

d. (U//FOUO) Continue implementation of RAM and a review of policies and procedures, especially in regards to cooperation or assistance with local emergency responders.

5. POC is Antiterrorism Program Coordinator, -[redacted- at (410) 702-[redacted] or by e-mail [redacted]@us.army.mil [Redacted LTC author’s name]

DISTRIBUTION:
ATOs
MSCs CDRs

In case you just simply skimmed through the whole thing (I admit that military memos are a long a boring read) I’d like to point your attention to Paragraph #5 which states: “POC is Antiterrorism Program Coordinator.”

Barack Obama is bending over backward to kiss the rear-ends of jack-booted thugs like Chavez, Ortega and Castro and is trying to grant real terrorists Constitutional rights that could get them released from prison, but he refers to Americans who are exercising their First Amendment rights of freedom of Speech and Freedom of Assembly as possible terrorists?

Given that all of the demonstrations were peaceful and without incident, you can see how out-of-touch Barack Obama and the leftist controlled government is with reality on this one.

You can access the original news story and the Maryland National Guard Memos on-line here:

Md. Guard Issues Warning To Staff About Local TEA Party Protestors
David Noss
Southern Maryland Online
April 15, 2009

Some Quick Thoughts On The Tax Day Tea Parties

I’ve been looking at the news and comparing the ways each network covered the Tax Day Tea Parties. Of course, left-leaning news outlets said every possible negative thing they could have said about the demonstrations, even things that were not true. It is those untrue items I wish to discuss here.

Item #1: The claim that Fox News orchestrated the 800 or so Tea Party events around the nation for a ratings boost.

The truth: Fox News simply covered the events, they did not orchestrate them. They presented the story in a fair, objective manner and were about the only network to do so. ABC, NBC, CBS and CNN all parroted the same lines over and over as if they were reading some talking points that someone handed to them.

0904150011

Item #2: The claim that Rush Limbaugh orchestrated the 800 or so Tea Party events arouind the nation.

The truth: Rush may be the most popular talk radio host in the world right now, but I do not remember him ever putting forth one single idea or plan one little detail of any of those demonstrations. In fact, I don’t even recall his name being mentioned at any of the 800 events.

img_0330

Item #3: The claim that the rich orchestrated these Tea Parties in an effort to justify their own greed.

The truth: Well, I don’t remember seeing very many rich people on the television or Internet news coverage of the Tea Parties. In fact, I saw mainstream Joe and Jane Average Americans. I saw parents with children. I saw small business owners. If there were any rich people in those crowds, they blended in quite nicely.

img_0396

So, why am I bringing all of this up? Because these Tea Parties are not the end. There will be more demonstrations against the excesses of the current leftist-controlled federal government as time goes on. As Congress passes more “intolerable acts” and Barack Obama signs them into law, people will become more and more angry and demand that the government finally listen to them.

Now, far from trying to correct the above misconceptions, I actually want to see Old Media and groups like ACORN and MoveOn.org coninue to spread those lies. Why? Because it is a major advantage for our side if they do so.

As long as Old Media is assigning responsibility to the wrong crowd, the people who really did organize and mobilize these Tea Parties will be free to continue their planning and organizing unhindered and unfettered by distractions. They will be free to plan and organize new Freedom demonstrations for the coming 4th of July. Further, the more that the left attacks Fox, Rush and others, the more that the organizers and planners will know how big of an impact they really made.

So, to all the hate-mongers over on the left, please, continue shouting that Fox News or Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity or Neal Boortz put these things together. The more you convince yourselves of that, the more you will leave the real planners and organizers alone to plan and organize more. It is the best thing you can do for our side.

84rules

Tea Party Messages Resonate Loudly Among Average Citizens (Photos Included)

Thomas Jefferson once said, “When people fear the government, that’s tyranny. When government fears the people, that’s liberty.”

The U.S. Government should take the time to understand what Jefferson said and to relate it to yesterday’s Tea Parties.

Those tea parties were not the elite coming together nor was it the rich coming out in an effort to keep their money. It was Joe and Jane Average American sending a message to D.C. That message is: “We’re fed up with your wasteful mismanagement of our money and your selling off of our children’s future.”

Look at the pictures below. They are randomly selected from the 800 or so tea parties that took place yesterday. You will not see fear of the government in these people’s eyes. You will see anger; an anger that can only be placated on the day when politicians in D.C. do the right thing. It does not look like that day will come under Barack Obama or with a Democrat-controlled congress. But that day will come soon.

Contrary to what the libs are saying about these events, they were not organized by Fox News nor were they put together by Rush Limbaugh. These were not Republican operatives. These were common men and women coming together for a higher purpose. They were not called to come, they came of their own volition. This is more than just a grass-roots movement. What we saw yesterday was the beginning of the Second American Revolution.

There were no riots. Police officers who were sent to maintain the peace saw nothing but peace.

The pictures:

s01g2s6948-r5zc9paf

piggybank

img_1552

img_1330

hfd-tea-party-11

090415034600teaparty5

090415034546teaparty7

It won’t stop here. People are angry at what the socialists in Congress and the White House are trying to do. The people will win in the end.

Chuck Norris: Barack Obama And The “J” Word

When I was growing up in the 1970’s and going to elementary school in Prince George’s County, Maryland, I very much enjoyed studying the history of the American Revolution. It was always a very big deal for us and we used to have “festivals” celebrating the founding of the United States and celebrating the ideas that the Founders wrote about.

That doesn’t seem to happen much anymore. Somewhere along the line, our educational system began to “forget” about where we came from. And, if you don’t know where you came from, you cannot get to where you’re going.

How many of us still believe as the Founders did? I mean, really believe. How many of us even know what the Founders believed?

That number is getting smaller and smaller even thought our population is getting bigger and bigger.

John Adams once said, “Our constitution is only fit for a moral and religious people. It is wholly unsuited to the governance of any other kind.”

Perhaps that quote merely sounded like Christian bravado over the years, but today, we may be witnessing the true meaning of those words.

The Constitution was originally written so that people of all faiths could come to the New World and worship according their own conscious. But the deeper meaning is that they were free from having any particular religion forced upon them by the state. John Adams envisioned such a nation growing in North America.

What neither he nor any other Founder envisioned was that atheistic movements would spring up and threaten to drown out the faithful from the public scene. The reason that Adams said that our Constitution was “wholly unsuited to the governance of any other kind” was because the Constitution contained no controls over those who would reject morality and decency in favor of hedonism and self-indulgence.

For example, the Consitution contains no reference to the crime of murder. Why? Because the Founders knew that the good and moral people of the several states would enforce a “murder is a crime” civic code. That one is simple to explain.

But, the Constitution also contains language that guarantees certain liberties like free speech. Does that mean that you are free to go over to your neighbor’s house and begin yelling obscenities at your neighbor’s children because they are praying where you can see them? Again, the Founders would never have considered this to be a problem and were certain that local communities were filled with people who would find such a prospect horrifying. But, now you can see the grey area where, over the past hundred years or so, the non-faithful have been working in and exploiting legal loopholes.

This is, I believe, precisely why John Adams said what he said. It wasn’t meant as a compliment to the faithful, it was meant as a warning of what could happen if the faithful ever lost their public voice.

Chuck Norris, writing for Town Hall notes a few things:

Under Article VI, Section 3 of the new Constitution, denominational tests for public office were prohibited, but the idea that Judeo-Christian ideas and practices must be kept separate from government would have struck our Founders as ridiculous because the very basis for the Founders’ ideas were rights that were endowed upon all of us by our Creator.

It was everywhere in public life back in the late 1700’s. Even Benjamin Rush advocated diversity long before it became a left-wing political buzzword:

“Such is my veneration for every religion that reveals the attributes of the Deity, or a future state of rewards and punishments, that I had rather see the opinions of Confucius or Mohammed inculcated upon our youth, than see them grow up wholly devoid of a system of religious principles. But the religion I mean to recommend in this place is that of the New Testament.”

Well, maybe not so much Mohammed, but clearly, Rush saw the dangers of allowing atheism to overshadow faith.

More:

[S]igners of the Constitution included Abraham Baldwin, a minister. Others had studied religion but never were ordained. And again, most signers of the Constitution were also Protestants. Two, Charles Carroll and Thomas Fitzsimons, were Roman Catholics.

Like George Washington, I don’t believe we can maintain morality and civility apart from a religious foundation: “Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. … Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.”

One of the problems we are facing here in modern times is that groups like the ACLU have twisted the First Amendment around so that “Freedom of religion” now means to them “Freedom from religion.” They like to point to the part of the First Amendment that says: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,” but seem to conveniently forget the rest of that line which statess, “or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” The Founders envisioned people having the right to worship in public, something that atheists claim is “offensive.” In other words, the ACLU and their anti-religious allies are seeking to force us all to act like atheists.

So, why hasn’t our new president shown any regard for any religion except Islam? Chuck Norris isn’t afraid to ask the following question:

Is Obama afraid of the word “Jesus”?

The Founders weren’t. And we shouldn’t be either. Feel free to express your religious convictions anywhere you please. If the ACLU tries to stop you, remind them of the part of the First Amendment that states “or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.

You can access the complete column on-line here:

Is Obama Afraid Of The J-Word?
Chuck Norris
TownHall.com
April 7, 2009

Debbie Stabenow Wants ‘Hearings’ For Fairness Doctrine Censorship

Check out this exchange between Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) and radio host Bill Press:

BILL PRESS: Yeah, I mean, look: They have a right to say that. They’ve got a right to express that. But, they should not be the only voices heard. So, is it time to bring back the Fairness Doctrine?

SENATOR DEBBIE STABENOW (D-MI): I think it’s absolutely time to pass a standard. Now, whether it’s called the Fairness Standard, whether it’s called something else — I absolutely think it’s time to be bringing accountability to the airwaves. I mean, our new president has talked rightly about accountability and transparency. You know, that we all have to step up and be responsible. And, I think in this case, there needs to be some accountability and standards put in place.

BILL PRESS: Can we count on you to push for some hearings in the United States Senate this year, to bring these owners in and hold them accountable?

SENATOR DEBBIE STABENOW (D-MI): I have already had some discussions with colleagues and, you know, I feel like that’s gonna happen. Yep.

First, it is a well-known fact that attempts to bring back censorship under the guise of a “Fairness Doctrine” are nothing more than attempts to squelch the opposition’s point of view.

But even more interesting is that Stabenow want hearings on the issue.

I say: “Bring it on!”

I’ll bet that Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, Laura Ingraham, Monica Crowley and Mark Levin will have a five-way fist fight to see who will be the first to march into those hearings and rake those Senators over the coals.

The conservative talk radio hosts who do show up and testify will expose every hypocrisy and every double-standard people like Stabenow hold. For example, why does Stabenow want “fairness” brought to talk radio but is perfectly willing to allow programs like Today Show, Good Morning America, Larry King and newspapers like The Washington Post and New York Times, to continue to be biased towards the leftist-liberals?

That is exactly the type of hypocrisy that would be highlighted during these hearings.

Further, talk radio hosts will bring to the fore-front many stories that television and print media largely ignored. For example, why did the media give Obama a pass for his relationship with the racist Reverend Jeremiah Wright but came down so hard on Sarah Palin for her main-stream religious views? Why was Obama not fully vetted by the media while an Army of reporters stormed Alaska looking for any dirt they could find?

These and other issues will come to light if Stabenow really does hold these hearings.

I say: “Let’s do it! Let’s start peeling back the onion!”

It would be one of the best things to happen in America in a long time.

You can access the transcripts and a video on-line here:

Sen. Stabenow Wants Hearings On Radio ‘Accountability’; Talks Fairness Doctrine
Michael Calderone
The Politico
February 5, 2009

Tony Blankley Exposes The Arrogant Hypocrisy Of The Leftist Media And Its Dem Supporters

Look for many differences between the previous eight years and the next four years. Of course, you already knew to do that. But look at what issues are going to be tackled differently and why.

One of those issues is censorship and the manner in which Old Media deals with the Chief Executive. Tony Blankley’s new book, American Grit, contains a chapter about just this and it would be a good idea to look into it further.

Writing for Town Hall, Brent Bozell takes us on a guided tour of that chapter and what it means:

He reminds us that during the Bush years, “the media blissfully endangered America’s safety for the pleasure of striking a blow at a president it despised. … Even when there’s no allegation of wrongdoing, it seems that many newspapers today take a perverse pride in revealing U.S. intelligence secrets.”

It’s these repeated actions by papers like the New York Times exposing and destroying our anti-terrorist programs (and in the case of the Los Angeles Times, tattling about how our government encouraged defectors from Iran’s nuclear program) that cries out for censorship, Blankley argues. It’s not enough to hope these newspapers will now cooperate with the Obama administration when it wants them to keep its actions secret.

In other words, leftist publications like the New York Times had absolutely no problem with endangering Americans by revealing our secrets when it would be an embarrassment to President Bush to do so, but they will help President Obama by keeping his darkest secrets safe.

More:

Blankley trenchantly recounts left-wing hacks like CNN’s Jack Cafferty and Newsweek’s Jonathan Alter finding the seeds of a “full-blown dictatorship” in the Bush White House, and snarling Joe Conason claiming Bush was headed toward an “authoritarian peril.” Blankley dismisses these claims for showing “an embarrassing ignorance of the history of executive authority.”

There were numerous shrill cries from the leftist media that the Bush Administration was engaging in some sort of censorship of the news. But it never happened. There is no evidence for it whatsoever. In fact, the evidence argues the opposite.

But what is real censorship? Let’s take a look at the Presidents whom Barack Obama idolizes and see what their records on censorship were:

President Lincoln shut down dozens of newspapers and imprisoned their editors. During World War I, President Woodrow Wilson’s Sedition Act banned “uttering, printing, writing or publishing any disloyal, profane, scurrilous or abusive language about the United States government or the military.” At least 75 periodicals were banned by the postmaster general. During World War II, President Franklin Roosevelt gave FBI director J. Edgar Hoover the power to censor all news or communications entering or leaving America. Blankley notes FDR repeatedly asked his attorney general, Francis Biddle, “When are you going to indict the seditionists?”

Let’s see, Lincoln, FDR and Wilson. Yep, Barack Obama holds those three in high regard. Think the leftists at the NYT will report on this? Probably not.

But was there any kind of censorship during the Bush years?

By contrast, during those allegedly dictatorial Bush years, our national newspapers proudly published op-eds by founders and supporters of terrorist groups like Hamas and Hezbollah.

Dictatorial censorship? Hardly. It was the working of a Free Press and President Bush allowed it to happen despite shrill claims from the left and pathetic attempts at re-writing history.

What is Obama’s view on this?

President Obama has already signaled that it isn’t Hamas chieftains he wants to silence, but conservative talk-radio hosts like Rush Limbaugh.

Who do these leftists think they are kidding? Obama and his followers are clearly on the path of allowing America’s enemies every chance to stand up and speak while simultaneously trying to censor private American citizens.

You can access the complete column on-line here:

Tony Blankley’s Untimely Cry
Brent Bozell III
TownHall.com
January 28, 2009

The Silencing Of The Opposition Is To Begin Almost Immediately

Reports are going around Washington D.C. that Barack Obama plans on putting Henry Rivera back as the head of the Federal Communications Commission and that this signals Obvama’s intention to silence any and all of his critics, especially those of us on the Internet and on Talk Radio.

From Multi-Channel News:

President-elect Barack Obama is expected to name Washington, D.C. lawyer Henry Rivera, a Democrat, to head a transition team focused on the Federal Communications Commission, according to informed sources.

Sources: Rivera To Head Obama’s FCC Transition Team
Ted Hearn
Multi-Channel News
November 5, 2008

This should be a major concern for anyone who believes in the rights guaranteed to us under the First Amendment. Henry Rivera is a huge champion of the mis-nomered “Fairness Doctrine” which would effectively snuff out Conservative Talk Radio and silence any Conservative dissenters.

According to World Net Daily:

If reenacted, the “Fairness Doctrine” would require broadcasts over the public airwaves to give equal time to opposing political views. For talk radio, which boomed after the law’s repeal in 1987 by building an audience devoted to conservative talk, the law’s return would decimate the industry’s marketability.

Many fear the “Fairness Doctrine” would drive talk radio hosts – like Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Michael Savage – out of business.

Brian Maloney of the blog The Radio Equalizer said in his post, “Meet Talk’s Executioner,” he believes Rivera will use his position to bring back the law for that very purpose.

Rivera, according to Maloney, “is expected to lead the push to dismantle commercial talk radio that is favored by a number of Democratic Party senators. Rivera will play a pivotal role in preventing critics from having a public voice during Obama’s tenure in office.”

Although Obama claims to want a “diversity of viewpoints” coming through the airwaves, his actions suggest otherwise:

“Barack Obama has shown a stunning lack of tolerance for free speech throughout the course of this campaign,” said O’Leary. “His presidency, combined with supermajorities for Democrats in Congress, would almost certainly bring back the so-called ‘Fairness Doctrine’ and allow the Democrats to snuff out any broadcasters with whom they disagree.”

Democrats in Congress have been more definitive in advocating the “Fairness Doctrine.”

In June, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., affirmed her support to Human Events reporter John Gizzi.

Speaking on Albuquerque station KKOB, Sen. Jeff Bingaman, D-N.M., told host Jim Villanucci, “I would want this station and all stations to have to present a balanced perspective and different points of view, instead of always hammering away at one side of the political [spectrum].”

Look at what they did to Barbara West of WFTV in Orlando Florida after she asked a tough question of Joe Biden instead of throwing a softball as most of the leftist-media did for the Obama campaign.

This appointment will be very bad for those of us who believe in Free Speech and a Free Press.

A few years ago, the Democrats were telling us that “dissent is patriotic.” Now they have changed their tune and are saying that “dissent must be silenced.”

Change is truly coming for us.

You can access the complete article on-line here:

Obama To Appoint Talk Radio’s Executioner?
World Net Daily
November 8, 2008