Watch the video: http://www.kmov.com/video/
Link available at Free Republic.
Here's a text synopsis of O Soma Merica.
September 27, 2008
Missouri's Obama Truth Squads
Lee Cary
Last Tuesday, CBS affiliate Channel 4 TV News in St. Louis reported that some Missouri sheriffs and prosecutors have formed a truth squad to target anyone who engages in misleading ad or statements about Senator Obama.
Here's the transcript of the lede on the CBS story:
"Senator Barack Obama's presidential campaign is asking Missouri law enforcement to target anyone who lies or runs a misleading television ad during the presidential campaign."
The implied threat in the Channel 4 report is that prosecutors and sheriffs across Missouri will enforce "Missouri ethics laws" and conduct criminal investigations of "anyone who lies or runs a misleading television ad" against Barack Obama. Although the report did not directly state that intent, that implied message was clearly conveyed.
Two high-profile officers of the court spoke on camera: Jennifer Joyce, St. Louis Circuit Attorney, and Robert P. McCullouch, St. Louis County Prosecuting Attorney. No one was available at either of their offices on Friday to comment on the story.
Channel 4 mentions the expected support of Jefferson County Sheriff Glen Boyer in the truth squad efforts. Captain Ralph Brown, in charge of press relations for the Sheriff's Department, could not be reached for comment on Friday.
Scott Holste, speaking Friday on behalf of the Missouri Attorney General's office, was available for comment. He said he had already been contacted about the Channel 4 report, that the Attorney General's office was not involved in any way with truth squads, and that he found the CBS news item to be "a mangled story."
Also on Friday, Joe Carroll, Director of Campaign Financing, Missouri Ethics Commission, said that he is "not familiar with any campaign law that applies."
John Mills, the Channel 4 reporter, was unavailable for comment Friday.
Was the St. Louis CBS affiliate complicit in the attempt, by some elected Democrat court officials in the St. Louis area, to stifle free political speech in Missouri on Senator Obama's behalf?
http://www.americanthinker.
Please feel free to leave a comment on this story. O Brave New World.
3 comments:
It's not clear what's going on. The prosecutors interviewed are only shown talking as if they are only going to publicly stand up and refute "lies" about Obama, e.g. that he is a Muslim. But why do they need a "truth squad" composed solely of prosecutors, police, and sheriffs? And what are these Missouri "ethics laws" the reporter mentions in relation to the Obama campaign desires?
Something is not adding up here. But I think the bottom line is that if you continue to insist on calling the man Barka, you'd better not be visiting St. Louis or you'll be singing the blues.
Joshua Muravchik writes: Obama's turn to electoral politics signified no change in his basic ideological orientation. As his wife Michelle put it: "Barack is not a politician first and foremost. He's a community activist exploring the viability of politics to make change." ("I take that observation as a compliment," Obama said as late as 2005.)
[...]
Even after declaring his candidacy, and despite a certain inevitable sidling rightward, Obama still reflected the presuppositions of a radical worldview. In one notable remark, he said of voters in economic distress that in their desperation they "cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them." Chastised for his condescension, he responded: "I said something that everybody knows is true." This was elitism of a very specific kind--the mentality of the community organizer, according to which people in the grip of "false consciousness" need to be enlightened as to the true nature of their class interests, and to the nature of their true class enemies.
The same suppositions are again evident in Obama's stances on international issues. Iraq, as he sees it, is only a symptom. "I don't want to just end the war ... I want to end the mindset that got us into war in the first place."
[...]
And if he wins? Without a doubt, it will be a thrilling moment. But the enduring importance of that landmark event will depend on the subsequent effectiveness of his presidency. If his tenure--like that of, say, Richard Nixon or Jimmy Carter--should end by inviting scorn, then it may open as many wounds as it heals. On the other hand, it is not unimaginable that he may rise to the challenge of the office and govern from the center, as he will have to do to succeed. This, however, would truly involve reinventing himself, a task for which his intellectual and ideological background furnishes few materials.
All the evidence I see is that regardless of how "harmless" Barka might be in office, his supporters are a genuine menace to America as America. It seem s to be lost or forgotten or despised that America is about a very specific kind of politics: that of personal liberty, of self reliance, and lack of government control. If Osama wins this election and presses ahead to satisfy his constituents, then we will lose even more of the America that is what America is. So, if Kansas City, Kansas City, here I come is not where I'm going, something is big time wrong.
Post a Comment