[jimkress]

Bush forgot to mention CFR.

Here's the letter I faxed to Bush on that topic:

You have attained success in your attempt to restrict the ability of your constituents to comment upon or criticize your political behavior. The USSC upheld your traitorous, evil, affirmative signature on the CFR legislation.

As Scalia so eloquently stated:

"The first instinct of power is the retention of power, and, under a Constitution that requires periodic elections, that is best achieved by the suppression of election time speech. We have witnessed merely the second scene of Act I of what promises to be a lengthy tragedy. In scene 3 the Court, having abandoned most of the First Amendment weaponry that Buckley left intact, will be even less equipped to resist the incumbents' writing of the rules of political debate. The federal election campaign laws, which are already (as today's opinions show) so voluminous, so detailed, so complex, that no ordinary citizen dare run for office, or even contribute a significant sum, without hiring an expert advisor in the field, can be expected to grow more voluminous, more detailed, and more complex in the years to come — and always, always, with the objective of reducing the excessive amount of speech. "

The key point here is that you and the rest of the ruling political class have now legally constrained who can speak about you and when. The rest of the act is just fluff.

Repeat: We are now restricted, by law (by you), from speaking about political candidates prior to an election upon pain of imprisonment.

Some will argue that, oh it's only certain groups of people who cannot speak, but that is a red herring. Once the ability of the American people to manifest political speech has been limited, it is only a matter of time until that freedom to speak is reduced to complete uselessness. Indeed, ultimately we will be told we have the freedom of political speech but the only situation in which we will be able to exercise that 'freedom' will be when we are alone in the toilet.

You, the political class, have now made it clear you are separated from us common folk. You have established the precedent of yourselves as the new feudal aristocracy in America and objections from us common folk will not be tolerated upon penalty of imprisonment.

In 2000 I prayed for your victory. I voted for you. I rejoiced when you won.

You have betrayed that support.

From this point on I will publicly oppose your position as President. I will actively work against your re-election attempt - due primarily to your decision to impose an untouchable political aristocracy upon your constituents. I will do all in my power to assure that neither you nor your progeny will ever again subvert and corrupt the freedom given us by God and protected by the blood of our citizens.

You have earned the enmity of all who love liberty and resist tyranny. You have made it clear you represent the same evil that gave the world Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot and Hitler. You have subverted liberty. You have imposed tyranny upon your constituents.

May God have mercy on your soul.

[MeekOneGOP]

CFR is the only thing I was vigorously campaigning for Bush to veto.
But my e-mails weren't of the same variety as yours.

Perhaps you might want to see this, if you haven't already ?? ...

I'll Stand with George W. Bush

I certainly hope that Dean or ANY of the 'RATS don't win their 'Regime
Change' next year.

God save us if THAT should happen. I'd rather get this than the girlie-man
MetroSexual ...

[M Kehoe]

Imho, most of this screed is hyperbole, but you do make a valid point regarding CFR. So, are you a one issue voter? And if so, do you think a Dean presidency would protect your rights better?

I think not.

5.56mm

[The_Eaglet]

Excellent letter!
The only change I would suggest is from "legally" to "unconstitutionally" as in the following sentence:

The key point here is that you and the rest of the ruling political class have now legally, [unconstitutionally] constrained who can speak about you and when.