Posted on : 9/23/2012 07:00:00 AM | By : Dann | In : , , ,

As part of the fallout from the 9/11/2012 terrorist attacks, we had yet another example of the utter fecklessness of Mr. Obama's administration with respect to its sworn duty to protect and defend individual liberty.  In specific, the freedom of speech; including the right to make confrontational, offensive, and what some might consider blasphemous statements about any religion.

The Blogfather has the core of the issue precisely right.

Just after midnight Saturday morning, authorities descended on the Cerritos home of the man believed to be the filmmaker behind the anti-Muslim movie that has sparked protests and rioting in the Muslim world.”

When taking office, the President does not swear to create jobs. He does not swear to “grow the economy.” He does not swear to institute “fairness.” The only oath the President takes is this one:
I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.
By sending — literally — brownshirted enforcers to engage in — literally — a midnight knock at the door of a man for the non-crime of embarrassing the President of the United States and his administration, President Obama violated that oath. You can try to pretty this up (It’s just about possible probation violations! Sure.), or make excuses or draw distinctions, but that’s what’s happened. It is a betrayal of his duties as President, and a disgrace.
Where are the voices concerned with civil liberties?  Where are the people that reject any limits on speech that criticizes religious abuses?  Where are the people that bristle at any suggestion that they moderate their tone in the service of civility?

A few years back such folks could readily be found having a case of the vapors over the suggestion of by a Whitehouse(1) press secretary that people ought to carefully consider the words they use.

But now that real live police have yanked a real live film maker out of his home, these folks are strangely quiet.

The phrase "Have you no sense of decency" has been sadly used, abused, folded, spindled, and mutilated to the point where it has lost any power it might once have possessed to call attention to uniquely offensive actions by government officials.  We are a shameless nation.  And we are poorer for it.

(1) I had yet to use the word "Whitehouse" on this computer.  The spell-checker suggested other options.  The last one was "whorehouse".  Amusing.

And just in case, it would have been amusing if this had happened 5 years ago, or 5 months(2) from now when someone not named Barack Obama was in the Oval Office.

(2) A guy can hope, can't he?

Share this :

  • Stumble upon
  • twitter

Comments (2)

Dann, this entry worries me more than anything I recall your posting because that piece is so completely devoid of substance, and you don’t seem to see it.

And that’s NOT disagreement with you about the first amendment. You and I are on absolutely the same side regarding free speech. The blood of the victims should be on the hands of their killers, and not on anyone connected with the film, however obnoxious it was.

But come on! Inflammatory language is standard procedure nowadays, but this is one over-the-top example.

The film “embarrassed” the Obama Administration?

People including US govt officials were murdered. And this writer is actually willing to trivialize that -- something any of us, including the right, would ordinarily find enraging -- as an “embarrassment” just to set it against “brownshirted enforcers” “descending”.

Do any us give a hoot what color L.A. Sheriff’s Dept uniforms are? If they were blue, would it just ruin that writer's day?

L.A. deputies question somebody so Obama is failing to uphold the Constitution??

If “authorities” can make you come downtown to answer questions, you’re not free? I'd think the most ardently GOP cop in the country would ream this twit for that. Sure the guy agreed to a “voluntary” interview and the quotes are rightfully skeptical, but being questioned violates no rights. No one has the right to not be questioned. I can’t believe the writer would claim they do.

I understand that waiting till the administration actually does something unconstitutional is too boring when Obama opponents can suggest, and stretch, and imply, and make people mad right now. But I can’t believe you can’t see through it.

Again, do you understand that you and I would agree about the unconstitutionality of penalizing, much less prosecuting, someone for making a movie, IF it actually happened?

But if somebody filmed you reciting, say, an e. e. cummings poem, and then dubbed in “Muhammed $%x (^%k ” over that and posted it to youtube, I strongly suspect that there’s some real, and good, law under which he could be prosecuted, especially if you got death threats, or death, afterward. That’s what’s happened to the cast and crew of this piece of ...., who were hired to make a sci fi movie.

OK, so, are you *sure* you want more comments on your blog?? 8~)

Thanks for stopping by, Ruth. I'll be back with you. Life is a little busy ATM.