Jump to content

Menu
Giving You and Your Child a Road Map to the Best Possible Education
The Well-Trained Mind Community

What is up with this? Obama using law enforcement to silence opposition

Parrothead
 Share

Recommended Posts

Parrothead

Parrothead

Posted
Posted (edited)

This is a statement from Missouri Governor Matt Blunt. http://governor.mo.gov/cgi-bin/coranto/viewnews.cgi?id=EkkkVFulkpOzXqGMaj&style=Default+News+Style&tmpl=newsitem

 

What is Obama so afraid of that he needs law enforcement to threaten and intimidate?

 

 

Here is another article with video talking about the "Truth Squad." http://www.kxmb.com/getArticle.asp?ArticleId=279948

Edited by Parrothead
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Parrothead

Parrothead

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I think it is scary. If he is willing to endorse this on the campaign trail, what will he endorse as president? What will he do with FBI, CIA, etc agents to get what he wants. Or even creating his own secret police type agency.

 

I don't know. maybe I'm reading more into this than there is. It scares me though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Parrothead

Parrothead

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
I can't find anything that confirms he wants to prosecute anyone.

 

How is this different than Mccain's truth squads, that also include public officials?

 

The difference is that according to the article you linked, McCain's people aren't using intimidation and threats of prosecution.

 

Here it is in the article Jean linked:

Missouri Prosecutors, Sheriffs 'Target Anyone Who Lies' About Barack Obama

A St. Louis television station reports — their words — "The Barack Obama campaign is asking Missouri law enforcement to target anyone who lies or runs a misleading TV ad during the presidential campaign."

 

Prosecutors and sheriffs from across Missouri are joining "The Barack Obama Truth Squad."

 

They mention Jennifer Joyce, St. Louis Circuit Attorney and Bob McCullough, prosecutor for St. Louis County in Missouri.

 

The reporter says, "They will be reminding voters that Barack Obama is a Christian who wants to cut taxes for anyone making less than $250,000 a year."

 

While the report never quite comes out and says that anyone running an ad saying those things would be subject to prosecution, that certainly is the message implied.

 

"..., that certainly is the message implied." Tell a lie about Obama in Missouri and face the possibility of being sent to jail.

Edited by Parrothead
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Donna T.

Donna T.

Posted
Posted

Hmm... doesn't that sound very vague for such a serious charge? I mean, I've read it several times and it just seems like something is going unsaid. Sounds like you have to an "insider" to even understand what Obama is actually doing.

 

As far as "police state tactics" go... well, those are some very strong words.

 

Go to Youtube and type in "RNC Protests". Then, type in "DNC Protests". Don't make a quick judgement. Look at the videos and THINK. Really think. "Police state tactics" were implemented and in full force before and during the conventions of both parties. The guys that run around in black clothing are instigators. Notice they are never the ones who get arrested.

 

This is not an "Obama" issue. Powerful people have enlisted the aid of other powerful people since forever.

 

:patriot:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Donna T.

Donna T.

Posted
Posted
:lurk5:

 

I could say something, but I won't. Nope, you aren't going to suck me into this conversation. I'm not going to do it.

 

:lol:

 

You're right. I should be quite, too. I just hope that we all realize that there are no political tactics or schemes that are unique to anyone in politics. Period. They are all in the fight together. Eventually, they'll all belly up on the golf course, or wherever.

 

Going now...

 

:leaving:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Perry

Perry

Posted
Posted

This is what St. Louis City Circuit Attorney Jennifer Joyce has to say about it:

 

 

As a citizen, I believe that elections should be about issues. I also have enormous respect for our First Amendment and freedom of speech. My sole purpose in participating in this initiative is about getting truthful information to the voters. This has never been or never will be about prosecuting people.

 

Clearly there are those who are attempting to twist the purpose of this initiative for their own benefit. This attack is a great example of how the truth is distorted in campaigns and what we’re trying to stand up against.

 

 

 

 

 
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pam "SFSOM" in TN

Pam "SFSOM" in TN

Posted
Posted (edited)
This is a statement from Missouri Governor Matt Blunt. http://governor.mo.gov/cgi-bin/coranto/viewnews.cgi?id=EkkkVFulkpOzXqGMaj&style=Default+News+Style&tmpl=newsitem

 

What is Obama so afraid of that he needs law enforcement to threaten and intimidate?

 

 

Here is another article with video talking about the "Truth Squad." http://www.kxmb.com/getArticle.asp?ArticleId=279948

 

I dunno, but I'll tell you this: John McCain could have used someone in his corner telling the TRUTH and calling out the liars who smeared him mercilessly (and untruthfully) in the South Carolina campaign in 2000. It was atrocious, it was horrific, it was racist and of the basest sort of racism as it involved lies about him and his adopted daughter's "true" parentage. It was hateful. It was HORRIBLE. I was ashamed to be living in South Carolina at the time, Columbia SC where the flag of Dixie and all her "glory" flew above the state house every single day. I get a little riled just thinking about it right now.

 

And it was Tucker Eskew who did this to him. Is it any wonder that Sen. Obama wants a couple of people on his side who are willing to take on this sort of evil should it rear its ugly head? Do you think Sen. Obama is calling for some sort of police state here? No. Nobody's going to be "targeted" or "prosecuted." That's just ludicrous. But surrogates for his campaign will remind people, if lies are spoken, the lies are being spoken. That intimidation is occurring. That push polling is taking place. At say... a press conference. Where real leaders from the community speak up and defend against idiocy.

 

The tax cut "defense" is patently silly, I'll grant you that. But in Missouri, to be wary of Tucker Eskew? Come on.

 

This is what, for example, the mean old "truth squad" did in South Carolina. Oh my. A press conference. Such intimidation. Such... shades of warrentless wiretapping and strong arm tactics. What's next, waterboarding? Or perhaps the US Army, for the first time in what, history?, will be given "homeland" tours starting in October, just in time for... what, exactly? Civil unrest? That the flippin' ARMY needs to quell? In OUR streets?

 

Someone should have grown a pair in 2000 and had a press conference for John McCain. I'm of the mind that the world would be a better place for that having happened.

 

Now back to your scheduled program of soothing, blood pressure-reducing music. Or whatever lowers your blood pressure. It's a free country.

Edited by Pam "SFSOM" in TN
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pam "SFSOM" in TN

Pam "SFSOM" in TN

Posted
Posted (edited)
How to Rig an Election

 

There is stuff like this already, and yes the republicans are doing their fair share. Is all fair in politics?

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPGJQ9x_Fgk

 

So, for those of you who think Democratic officials should not oversee or prosecute such things, do you think that Mr. Raymond should not have been prosecuted, should not have done time?

 

Do you not think that if the Democrats were doing such things (and don't you think for one minute that human beings on the other side of the aisle would not stoop so low) that Republican officials in the state should guard and watch and speak up and, if necessary, prosecute such goings on?

 

Does the man who stole the SC election from John McCain in 2000 and his ilk need to be given a free pass and a wink and a nod from Democrats who are in a position to watch such things because that would just be "wrong" and "communist" and "scary"? REALLY? Do people on the left who might do the same thing not need watching and monitoring and reporting about? Why not get some Republicans, like these Democrats, who are officials in their states and communities to volunteer to monitor the elections? Why shouldn't they speak up and out if fraud is happening and elections are being rigged?

 

Do we just let telephone fraud and voter fraud get a pass because we don't want to offend the perpetrators?

Edited by Pam "SFSOM" in TN
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pam "SFSOM" in TN

Pam "SFSOM" in TN

Posted
Posted

 

One hardly knows if or how to respond to admonishment like this...

 

That it's hopeful that people are rising up all over the country to monitor this election and calling people to accountability if necessary? That one hopes that some Republicans independent of Sen. McCain's campaighn will be this audacious and will rise up and hold Democrats accountable if they pull nasty stunts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
elizabeth

elizabeth

Posted
Posted

 

http://www.johnmccain.com/informing/news/PressReleases/90c928f6-38c7-4dc3-86c6-15149dbb8e07.htm mccain has the same committee just a different name...All they are doing is saying that IF there is a libel or slander case it will be prosecuted like any other libel or slander case . In essence, they will do their job as law enforcement. You might want to ponder why they are distorting the statements from law enforcement regarding their intent to do their jobs regardless of whether the lie is about a politician or not. It is much ado about nothing quite frankly . http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/voting/intro/intro.htm A much broader concern is voter intimidation in that state which has a history of those tactics . I strongly urge any one who really cares about being informed to read the attached docs from the US Department of Justice to understand why this issue is paramount. I must also state that unequivocally I do not think for a minute that elected officials who are in law enforcement should have made any comment regarding libel and slander law as it applies to both candidates and actually they need to brush up on the law...once you are a "public" figure there are almost zero protections in this regard it is nearly impossible to win a case thus, those who purport to be speaking out against libelous or slanderous language are really being ridiculous because the real issue is enforcing rights for all citizens as put forth in the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...