This picture and caption are a little tongue-in-cheek, but certainly point to a captivating time in American history. A time when a ragtag bunch of revolutionaries mustered everything they had to give in the fight against tyranny and oppression. They were heroes and they gave us this country we have today.
In reading the news, I am disheartened to consider today’s America — and particularly today’s governing bodies — for which these patriots fought. When they fought, they battled tyranny. Apparently, now our leaders seek to impose tyranny.
Over at the WSJ, Kim Strassel tells us of Obama’s abhorrent campaign behavior in creating an “enemies’ list comprised of Romney donors:
Try this thought experiment: You decide to donate money to Mitt Romney. You want change in the Oval Office, so you engage in your democratic right to send a check.
Several days later, President Barack Obama, the most powerful man on the planet, singles you out by name. His campaign brands you a Romney donor, shames you for “betting against America,” and accuses you of having a “less-than-reputable” record. The message from the man who controls the Justice Department (which can indict you), the SEC (which can fine you), and the IRS (which can audit you), is clear: You made a mistake donating that money.
* * *
This past week, one of [Obama's] campaign websites posted an item entitled “Behind the curtain: A brief history of Romney’s donors.” In the post, the Obama campaign named and shamed eight private citizens who had donated to his opponent. Describing the givers as all having “less-than-reputable records,” the post went on to make the extraordinary accusations that “quite a few” have also been “on the wrong side of the law” and profiting at “the expense of so many Americans.”
These are people like Paul Schorr and Sam and Jeffrey Fox, investors who the site outed for the crime of having “outsourced” jobs. T. Martin Fiorentino is scored for his work for a firm that forecloses on homes. Louis Bacon (a hedge-fund manager), Kent Burton (a “lobbyist”) and Thomas O’Malley (an energy CEO) stand accused of profiting from oil. Frank VanderSloot, the CEO of a home-products firm, is slimed as a “bitter foe of the gay rights movement.”
These are wealthy individuals, to be sure, but private citizens nonetheless. Not one holds elected office. Not one is a criminal. Not one has the barest fraction of the position or the power of the U.S. leader who is publicly assaulting them.
Then we look to news out of Obama’s Transportation Department and Congress, and I begin to really shudder learning that Big Brother is coming to our cars:
One of the most far-reaching and frightening pieces of legislation to come down the pike in quite some time has passed the Senate and is being readied for quick action by the Republican-controlled House. Lurking within its many pages, divisions, titles, parts and subparts is a host of restrictions and federal mandates that would make George Orwell’s head spin.
The misnamed “Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act,” commonly referred to inside the Washington Beltway as “MAP-21,” is so laden with federal highway and transportation funds that most House members probably will be inclined to vote for it without even reading the fine print. But it is that fine print that feeds steroids to the Washington Leviathan like few past pieces of legislation.
MAP-21 clearly bears the fingerprints of our nanny-in-chief, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood, but it passed the Senate last month by a strong bipartisan vote, 74 to 22. The massive bill federalizes everything within sight of the feds’ roving eye. So-called “open-container laws” would become uniform under federal guidelines, as would heretofore state-enforced laws regulating treatment of repeat DUI offenders. Interlock ignition devices would fall within Uncle Sam’s grasp. The availability of electronic charging stations — to launch all those electronic cars no one is buying — would be expanded.
Perhaps most troubling, at least for anyone who harbors even the remotest interest in privacy, MAP-21 mandates that within three years every single passenger vehicle in the country must be outfitted with a “vehicle event data recorder” — the proverbial “black box.”
The secretary of transportation, of course, is empowered to determine what will be recorded by these black boxes and the manner in which information can be retrieved, so as to ensure “uniformity.” Notwithstanding the legislation’s lip service to the “privacy” of the information contained in the black boxes, the list of reasons that authorize government access is long and vague. “Investigations” by law enforcement, as well as directives in any “legal proceeding” (such as, for example, a divorce or other civil or criminal case), would justify piercing the thin “privacy” shield nominally provided by MAP-21.
Read the full article here.
You may have considered the title of this post overly dramatic when you began. What do you think now?