...Or at least even more of.
Since I'm already earworming readers with well-known Broadway tunes, why not something from a different "Annie?"
Sadly, the subject of this morning's disquisition isn't as lighthearted: seems Our President, who as a candidate proclaimed that honoring the Rule of Law demanded that terror suspects be Mirandized, now tells us, no, no, noo, and he's urging Feds to go all Jack Bauer on terror suspects, especially if they suspect an immediate threat to public safety.
I'm sure many readers will tell me Mr. Obama has finally seen the light, but it bothers me; it's much too vague and flexible. At a time when Authorities are already tagging mainstream, freedom-friendly/gun friendly organizations as "terrorists" (and when gun-grabbing nutjobs go even farther) , I don't think this is a blunt instrument we should be letting the Federal Gummint wield unquestioned.
And I'm really wondering where all those Democrat activists who issued dire warnings about Federal overreach during the most recent Mr. Bush's tenure have scuttled off to. Guess it's okay when their guy is in charge of Room 101, then?
(This is posted on a delay, I have an eye doctor appointment early as you read it. Sure hope they can make lenses for my new frames; I may even splurge on contacts again.)
BUILDING A 1:1 BALUN
4 years ago
4 comments:
Don't forget the fellow who was selling round lumps of silver with stampings on them who was prosecuted as a terrorist.
Yep.
At a time when Authorities are already tagging mainstream, freedom-friendly/gun friendly organizations as "terrorists" (and when gun-grabbing nutjobs go even farther) , I don't think this is a blunt instrument we should be letting the Federal Gummint wield unquestioned.
Bingo.
Never allow the government any power that you wouldn't want used against you. Because if they can use it against you, sooner or later they will.
If it's not good for me, it's just as bad for thee.
Too bad more voters don't agree with and/or understand that.
Post a Comment