Posted on 08/26/2008 6:00:36 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
We noted here efforts by Barack Obama's campaign to shut down his critics' free speech. In particular, Obama obviously doesn't want the public to know about his long-term, cozy relationship with proud-to-be-a-terrorist Bill Ayers. Now, Obama himself has upped the ante by demanding that the conservative who funded the Ayers ad be criminally prosecuted:
Obama general counsel Bob Bauer today sent a second, sharper letter to the Justice Department, directly attacking the Dallas billionaire funding a harsh attack ad, Harold Simmons. "We reiterate our request that the Department of Justice fulfill its commitment to take prompt action to investigate and to prosecute the American issues Project, and we further request that the Department of Justice investigate and prosecute Howard (sic) Simmons for a knowing and willful violation of the individual aggregate contribution limits," he wrote.
Obama's suggestion that it is illegal for a 501(c)(4) entity to fund issue ads that are negative toward him appears ludicrous. Here's the real question, though: if Obama is elected President, will he appoint an Attorney General who will carry out politically-motivated prosecutions like the one he is now demanding? I suppose we can't know for sure, but why wouldn't he? If he demands criminal prosecution of free speech that opposes his political interests when he's a candidate, why wouldn't he order it as President?
Does a bear shit in the woods? Does the sun rise in the east?
Not just the US Department of Justice. Bigger than that.
Hitler used the Reichstag Fire to eliminate the Weimar Republic to become dictator.
It wouldn’t surprise me if Obama and his minions would do something similar.
Obama must not be elected, for the sake of our country.
Read “The Forgotten Man” by Amity Shlaes...see how the FDR administration treated the opposition.
Liberals love to use the strong arm of the government to further their aims and produce more ‘enemies’. It’s a given.
Does Maureen Dowd shit in the woods?
We have the two farthest leaning “democrats” running for the highest seat in the land and the opposition has a left leaning moderate. Why? We have one party running as far left as they can get and the other compromising our future.
None of the democrats issues, rhetoric, etc. match their behaviors! None of it! They have or will put up for Presidency a man grossly unqualified, unvetted, and unlinked to America as their candidate!?
I don't get it.
At what point do these tactics go to voter intimidation and electoral fraud?
At what point do these tactics go to suppression of Freedom Speech, which leads to freedom of information?
After promising to filibuster the FISA deal, Obama turned around and voted “Aye.” Who are we supposed to think he intends to use those powers against, should he be elected? What suddenly made it seem like such a good idea he was willing to totally reverse a campaign promise? Of course he’s salivating over the prospect of making his political enemies pay.
He’s also said he wants his own security force bigger & better funded than the military, IIRC.
That is why I questioned the need for a Department of Homeland Security..
The FCC and the FEC would prevent any reactionary ideas from being posted or peer-to-peered. Goodbye usenet, goodbye FR, goodbye blogs. Except blogs that toe the line and talk about how great the Olympics are!
Employment regulation would increase -- re-education and firing of any unwilling to toe the PC line. Victim-group affirmative-action haves would be aggressively favored in every aspect of now-government regulated life.
The Government will favor sexual perversions and demand that school kids indulge. Obama's mentor Frank Davis's lurid stories will be prudish in comparison to what would happen.
This would a public-private-elite partnership or a highly coordinated order. Huge, gigantic.
A new police force? That's important, maybe, but small potatoes.
If some foreign country sets up a "war crimes" commission and demands Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and other American officials be extradited for trial, would Obama comply? It might be a good idea if someone would ask him during the campaign. He'd have to say "no" even if he intended to hand them over, but it would really annoy his supporters to hear that "no."
Is water wet?
An Obama Justice Department/Ministry of Truth would be used to prosecute Conservatives.
No ambiguity needed.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.