Obama's impending Thugocracy
Monday, October 20, 2008 at 10:28AM I have to wonder how much longer we'll be able to keep NH Insider running if Obama's thugocracy takes power in January.
When it was Palin who was getting hammerd by the Obama thugs it seemed grossly unfair, but at least it was a political challanger. Now we've got some guy named Joe, who happens to be a plumber, who asked a simple question, which openly demonstrated what a socialist wealth-redistributing dirt-bag Obama really is, and now Obama's thugs and their media buddies are tearing this guy apart before he can become a ralleying cry for the opposition.
He just asked a question and he's getting gang raped.
How many people are looking at this and saying to themsleves, gosh, I'm not that interested in knowing what Obama really thinks, or questioning his policies. They could be coming to tear my life apart next. I'll just keep my mouth shut.
Right now, Obama wants DOJ to begin criminal prosecutions against McCain and Palin/and everyone who is questioning the legitimacy of ACORN's voter registration practices. He wants criminal prosecutions against anyone who is questioning the ethics and illegal behavoir of a group he was a part of and that his campaign supported. What kind of freedom does that protect?
Obama has promised to create an army of Americans who will work-hard for him and his policy objectives to create an America they can be proud of. Try an America full of domestic spies for the Chosen one.
And Obama has told us we can't just do whatever we want. He's actually said it publicly. We can't heat or cool our homes or businesses, or drive whatever vehicle we want, just becasue we want to. And he's got plans to straighten us out. What else won't we be able to do and who do we know that might rat us out?
The Obama campaign has been using legal pressure and threats of license-pulling againt any media outlet that brodcasts opinions they do not approve of. They are actively trying to supress political speech. And to extend this threat they want to change the FCC rules to force relicensing every two years instead of the current eight; this just happens to allow the government thugs more opportunities to crush private media owners who do not comply with thier desires, or limit their political speech to the favored party line.
Obama want's to regulate your lawn mower, your weed wacker, or anything else than runs on oil or gas, and if the Congress won't do it ASAP, he's threatened to use the EPA to create an executive mandate that will tell you what you can do and how you can live when it comes to using any fossile fuel. You wil live as he directs you, and if you don't you'll get prosecuted. Will your Obama loving neighbor rat you out?
Anything anyone says about Obama's ideas, his speeches, or hispolicies is twisted into a cry of racism, even though it has nothing to do with race? How will that play out moving forward?
Obama will pass the Fairness Doctrine, whose sole function is to limit a specific kind of speech--speech that contradicts what Obama want people to hear. Speech we rely on here to stimulate debate. What will we talk about then? How great Obama is?
And to make it all that much worse, Obama wants to take all of our guns away. So what's left?
As president Obama will have influence over the DOJ, FBI, CIA, NSA, and every other policing mechanism in America. He'll have executive authority over evey government agency; education; health; FCC; EPA, and on and on. With an army of green-shirts at his side, how long will it be before your dissent is made public? How long before your another Joe the plumber? And how many people will be willing to object to anything Obama says or does with that kind of threat hanging over their heads?
I'll save you a spot in my jail cell becasue I'm not going down without a fight. Here's to hoping it wont come to that.
Steve Mac Donald
On matters of oppressing speech; Michael Graham this morning, has been slamming the MA Sec of State, (Bill?) Galvin, for dropping the ball on tracking ballots for people in the military serving overseas. He has made the case that his indifference is politically motivated.
Galvin refused to appear on the program.
And just before Graham went off the air, Galvin had apparentyl filed a complaint with the FCC to shut Michael up.
Sound's like an attempt to suppress speech to me?
So who needs to get a new hobby?
Reader Comments (10)
Good try, but your scare tactics don't pass the smell test.
The only reason NH INSIDER will suffer under Obama is it's writers,
As you know I'll be leaving after the election.
The rest of you can rant on to each other all you want.
Obama and I could care less, frankly.
http://www.nhinsider.com/richard-barnes/2008/10/2/obamas-truth-squads.html
Obama has create "Truth Squads" and is already squashing free speech. As much as people like Chaz would like to deny it, this is FACT and it's already happening!
When it comes to it I'll take the bottom bunk in the cell.
As to Chaz, I didn't know you were leaving I'm sure we'll find someone else to write 50-100 left wing fluff posts per month in your place.
I'm kidding. Good luck, wherever life takes you.
As a programmer and Web developer I tend to approach this as partly a technological challenge. "The Internet interprets censorship as damage and routes around it." I'm looking into techniques to try to circumvent the censors.
First step would be to get offshore hosting. That's not a permanent fix but it will buy some time.
We will also need new technologies to replace DNS and the World Wide Web as we know it. Something called TOR ( http://tor.eff.org/ ) looks like a good start. Until this is in place use court challenges as a delaying action.
You don't see legislation like the Fairness doctrine as limiting speech by forcing time for alternative views?
What's next? I have to provide equal time on my soap box with whomever comes along?
Why can't they go get thier own soap-box and attract the crowd away from me with their superior ideas?
It can't just be because they can't get thier message out, your certainly convinced that you have a more popular view than the conservatives. No one really doubts that the left owns the old media, and the entire educational system top to bottom.
So why then does a liberal government have a desire to come in and regulate dissenting opinion?
Doesn't that sound a bit imperial to you?
Give Chaz some credit. He doesn't censor comments on his blogs like Andy Sylvia does.
If you'd like me to find 100 people to have a Carol Shea Porter rally at your house, i'll laugh and call it censorship when you call the cops.
Censorhip cannot be defind solely as a violation of free speech. If it were, there would be no legal standing for ordinaces regarding public decency, nudity, loud mouthed-drunks, or even the lefts obsession with "Hate" speech, and speech codes, several of which fail the smell test, but have been sustained as legal.
Merrimack citizens should be able to vote to prevent almost any verbal or public display unless it is protected "political" speech, and even then the speech can't be used as a vehicle to violate other ordinaces. You can't read a redress of greivances in the public square--naked--and call your arrest a violation of protectd free speech.
So kicking 100 uninvited CSP supporters off private property--regardless of what they are there to say--does not violate the first amendment.