No kidding folks. This is happening right here in what is left of Democracy in America. It seems that Barack "Barry Soetoro" Obama is practicing for his Planned borderline Communist government in Missouri–or so he thinks.

It made a lot of folks speechless when they saw the video. What a freaking thug Barack Obama truly is. We are worried about his Marxist Socialist pals? This is down righta Communist behavior! No wonder Putin and N. Korea’s “Dear Leader” think he’s swell. No wonder every whackjob failed fringe anti-democracy, anti-capitalism party from the 60s loves him.

The threat?: If somebody in Missouri does an Ad that Barack Obama deems “A Lie,” then the sheriff and the State Prosecutor are coming for you. And as we all know, when it comes to Barack Obama, EVERYTHING ANYBODY says is “A Lie,” even if it’s true.

See the Video first and let your jaw drop. Then see Governor Blunt’s horrified and disgusted press release.

This is happening right here in the United States of America, compliments of Obama and his goon squad.

-- Modified on 9/28/2008 8:11:48 AM

Obama is trying to stop NRA ads by threatening Legal Action !

It is laughable . NRA has 40 million to spend .
Fairfax, VA-Sen. Barack Obama's presidential campaign has sent threatening letters to news agencies in Pennsylvania and Ohio to stop airing ads exposing his anti-gun record sponsored by the National Rifle Association Political Victory Fund (NRA-PVF).

The kicker? NRA-PVF's Ohio’s ads have not yet begun running.

“Barack Obama and his campaign are terrified of the truth,” declared Chris W. Cox, Chairman of NRA-PVF. “Sen. Obama's statements and support for restricting access to firearms, raising taxes on guns and ammunition and voting against the use of firearms for self-defense in the home are a matter of public record. NRA-PVF will make sure that everyone knows of Obama's abysmal record on guns and hunting.”

The Obama campaign sent cease and desist letters to news outlets in Pennsylvania and Ohio, denouncing the ads and demanding their removal from the airwaves. All stations where NRA-PVF has purchased or plans to purchase ads have been provided with documented

http://www.gunbanobama.com/Default.aspx?NavGuid=c3d25dd2-7abd-4f24-8efd-d62bd977d7c2&ID=11588&Type=1




Maybe Missouri law enforcement will catch the Obama team

Libel, if proven, is a civil offense, a private cause of action, meaning not a prosecutable offense i.e. not criminal.


-- Modified on 9/27/2008 11:58:22 PM

-- Modified on 9/28/2008 12:02:59 AM

-- Modified on 9/28/2008 12:05:47 AM

I'm curious to know if you guys read the "threatening letter" that the Obama camp sent.

It makes a reasoned argument about ads that have clear, factual errors.  It doesn't just say the ads are lies it explains why they are.  

The Right will see see this as scary Obama's attack on the second Amendment and the Left and Center will see this for what it is:  Obama defending himself against lies that are sure to come. If you actually think the McCain camp hasn't engaged attack ads that are absolutely untrue all I can tell you is that you're in the minority - a minority that is shrinking.

It's a shame that that's what our politics has come to.

BTW - as a kicker for you, looks like Gallup is in the tank for Obama too!  Their poll about the debate has Obama winning 46-34.

No matter how you break it down, this is the most amazing step ever taken in the history of the First Amendment, in which I have some experience.

The core of the First Amendment, where it protects the most, is political speech. Futhermore, pure speech in the form of words - as distinguished from that mixed with conduct, like sit-ins or passing out handbills - has received the greatest protection.

Finally, the first amendment must be content neutral in that it can't favor one group and prohibit the other from engaging in similar conduct.

Unless it really creates a direct threat of a clear and present nature, there was no way law enforcement could even look at it.

Five years ago it would have been inconceivable that pure speech of a political nature could even be questioned because one party doesn't like it.

Of course, with the way that the left has been attacking free speech in the democracies of Canada and Western Europe, this is not a shock.

The funny thing is all the time that the left claims the right is so facist.  No one here can come up with a time that a group working under the titular head of the of the GOP ever suggested a law that would limit the free speech of someone disagreeing with the party. NEVER.

Of course, the despicable liars who push things like McCain having a black baby out of wedlock, etc. will all scream like bloody murder to protect our First Amendment rights.

Exercising your rights with a bit of responsibility goes a long way in curbing such overreactions as this.

No matter how offensive the speech.

You know how I feel about Socialism, but I will defend your right to the death,(hopefully of the other person, lol) to voice your opinion.

It does strike me as ironic that most assualts on the 1st Ammendment come from the "open minded" liberal sect.

The Obama campaign is determined that Repubs won't win by fraud.

Deliberately telling lies about somebody is usually called libel and slander. Is that an attack on free speech? The law that's sited was on the books in Missouri long before this election. Cease and desist orders have been around forever.

I'm not totally in agreement with it, but the devil is in the details. Who is charged and for saying what? Are they simply lying to win an election. That seems like a violation of free speech. Free speech doesn't mean you're allowed to lie for personal, political or economic gain. There's a word for that: fraud.

Let me tell you how this likely will work out. Somebody is charged, goes to court. The court issues a stay on the law to consider constitutionality. After the election, the case is dismissed.

It does discourage these sewer tactics with which Repubs have racked up election victories. What a ballsy tactic!

Obama is determined not to lose this campaign by getting smeared.

-- Modified on 9/28/2008 8:02:37 AM

Because first, he has done too many other things like it.

Second: I don't have the trust that he'd restrain it to targeting lies.

-- Modified on 9/28/2008 7:21:29 AM

Which is why I find the actions of the law enforcement officers so dismaying.

Keep in mind that the First Amendment protects offensive speech but not speech that is untrue. It's a shame that Rove, Scaife, the Swift Boaters for truth shitheads, etc. feel so comfortable spouting their lies that it makes others feel justified in suppressing free speech. Of course, the dems have their own liars but Rove and co. have taken it to a new and despicable level.

Where was your outrage when the MSM picked up on the patently untrue "story" that Sarah Palin was actually the grandmother of her youngest child?

Admit it Zin, you don't want fairness you just want your guy to win. Just like Conroy doesn't want "equal" rights, he wants special rights.

If someone makes untrue and libelous or slanderous statements, there are numerous legal redresses available, not the least of which is injuntive relief to stop the ads if there is  reasnonable evidence that the statements are untrue.

Have you ever wondered why if the Swiftboaters were guilty of such horrendous slander why Kerry never took action against them?

I mean you come down on their side on just about any issue. Guns. Taxation WITH representation. Race and Equality. Small, helpless hapless government. I have yet to see an independent thought from you that that hasn't been patented by conservatives. What's more, I think you carry your moral code in your wallet, and being taxed anything is like losing your moral code.

I'm for Obama, and if you followed my previous posts, you know that now I think the Repubs as having betrayed the country-- traitorously and lawlessly damaging it. That means for Obama right now, I give him a huge benefit-of-the-doubt.

Where was my outrage about Sara Palin? Why GG, I wasn't posting here that week. You've pre-judged. I was pretty busy at the time, but my thoughts were that the Democrats were trying too much for a first round knockout.

Just remember GG: a vote for McCain is a vote for Palin. If you're not ready to cut Obama some slack when you hear that, then you're extremely unpatriotic.    

-- Modified on 9/28/2008 8:31:08 AM

Lets see:

I am pro choice

I have no problem with Gay marriage

I am against school prayer

I am not a Palin supporter.

I think the Patriot act was a horrible piece of legislation.

I think I have made my point. You on the other hand are a complete and total partisan. You talk about my moral code being in my wallet, You're Goddamned right I vote with my wallet. It's fuckers like you that want to keep picking my pocket that makes me that way. I guarantee you I'LL pay several times more in taxes than you'll ever make, I am not white, I never inherited a fucking dime and I had to start work at fifteen, Boo fucking Hoo,start paying your own Goddamn way and I'll cut you some slack. I am sick and fucking tired of libs who don't contribute shit to this country claiming that us business owners don't pay enough.

Race and equality, you and Conroy can both fuck off, you don't want equality. If you want equality start paying YOUR fair share. You already have equality, if you are too stupid or too lazy to use the rights and opportunities you already have. TOUGH FUCKING SHIT!!!

9-man "You can't handle the truth" - You are just one of the blind idealogs that have no idea what they beleive in except for Demcrate dogma with no facts.  Have you heard the crap Biden is saying, Obama's one and onlyu excecutive desision in his entore life....I guess you can say it only has to get better...

talking about lies:
Democrates lie all the time:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs

Here are the facts on the present crisis:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5tZc8oH--o

Obama was asked to take the bracelet off:

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/warner-todd-huston/2008/09/28/family-told-obama-not-wear-soldier-sons-bracelet-where-media  

Restricting freedom of speech and lying about it:
http://fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2008/092008/09272008/413770

But liberals never want to debate, they just want people to do what they want because they can not debate on facts or point to accomplishments, because time/history always proved them wrong, Surge, mortages for people who can not pay for them, tax the rich give to the poor, etc...the list is endless.  What the country needs is real leadership and get rid of the crooks in politics,  unfortunately we are stuck with Democrats and Republicans. The Gov. can only do one thing well waste money so get a clue.    

Disclaimer:  I will vote for the less of 2 evils, McCain....

In the context of political speech, the First Amendment does not recognize "a lie."  

Never in the history of the United States has libel or slander been applied in the area of political speech.  Restrictions that would be permissible in some contexts just are out of the picture in politics.

The theory behind the First Amendment is that there should be open and robust debate on issues of public importance, and that in the market place of ideas the best ideas will win out, regardless of what else is said.  (It seems some people are afraid of this robust competition.)

There are two incredible ironies in this situation.

First, the New York Times - no conservative front - and others have commented on "inaccuracies," to be polite, in Obama's ads. But no one from the McCain campaign is threatening legal action.  

It is only the Dems that see the need to trample on the First Amendment.

Second, Obama is supposed to be so smart and articulate.  He has hundreds of millions to spend on advertising, and he has legions of people connected with the entertainment and communication industries.  

Funny how with all of that he is incapable of exposing what he believes is the truth.  

No. The Dems are little babies.  They toss dirt around as much as the next guy, but when the get a little on their shirt, they go crying to mommy.

As I have said many times, clean up your own act before commplaining about others.

Thank you

The same reason McCain never took action against Rove and Bush for the bullshit in SC in 2000.

That's the way the game is and always has been played.

Doesn't make it right.

And you're right, I'm not impartial now. I've made my decision. There was a time I was, but that time is past.

Here's my backgroiund: I served in the Navy and was going to nuke school, but got dropped on a medical and was discharged. That was devastating.

I had to work just to work. I had a painting business to get through college, well it went bust. I ended up living in a shack with a slanted floor hanging off the side of the house. The rent was cheap. I was selling plasma to get by. My father offered me money to stop, and I was too proud to take it.  

In those dark days I received no state aid, other than having my textbooks paid for one semester by voc rehab, and a very slight amount of unemployment. No food stamps, no transitional assistance. And for most of it, no car.

My parents would have supported me for decades. That wasn't the life I wanted. I paid off my student loans. I now have a good job and I'm fighting so I WON'T have to go on disability.  

I'm proud of what I've done. I will be prouder when I finish what I'm doing. It isn't a matter of ME wanting your wallet. I want a better United States. The money is yours just because the US of A printed and minted it. You could move your wealth into gold if you don't like it. You earned your wealth, but you've rented the country's cash.

And you didn't earn your money in a stone-aged third world country having to fight off barbarian hoards. You earned it in the system established by the USA. You could support the system, or you could leave it to teeter and maybe collapse because of millions of people insisting that the country could run without sufficient financial support. I predict that nothing in this country could be fixed as long as that's the predominant attitudes.  

As for race, no you're not a racist. I just don't think you have a clear picture of what's being faced now by the black population, especially in terms of the way they're policed, which gives a occupation and siege mentality. Or the fact that they get taken in any new scam that comes along. They were disproportionally wrecked by the sub-prime caper. They are easy targets because they're schools have been so poor for so long.

The Irish and the Italians had prohibition to lift their communities out of poverty. Then the New Deal. Otherwise, I think they'd still be a large part of the underclass. It's a myth that ethnic groups raise themselves out of poverty here. The only way to do it is to move into a niche, having a lock on a new industry.  

-- Modified on 9/28/2008 8:39:59 PM

And don't tell me that Republicans haven't told despicable lies during the election. McCain resorted to it earlier. Unethical tactics begets unethical tactics.

I already laid out what I know is going to happen. A test case will go to court, and that law will be knocked down. And the devil is in the details.

For myself, I'm a nihilist remember? I used to write that on this board, maybe before your time. For a nihilist, I'm believe I'm quite ethical. My moral code is an aspiration, not a rigid formula. It's an intention.  

But I'm not going to be trapped into upholding ethical standards that the other side has no intention of respecting, and they have every intention of using it for factional gain. That's what's known as-- stupid.

So, I admire Obama for his balls. Even though I think the move might be dangerous.

-- Modified on 9/28/2008 9:08:13 PM

but your own words contradict you. No one but the most rabid of Republican haters could believe that you would not stoop to any lie, strech any point, or just plain old invent shit to further your cause.

So the Irish and Italians were only able to rise above poverty because they broke the law, and were criminals?  Well then, under your logical thought, the blacks should become better at selling drugs to lift them up.

Not every Irishman sold bootleg whiskey, and not every Italian is in the Mafia.  So get a fucking clue dumbass.  



-- Modified on 9/29/2008 1:26:40 PM

What do you expect.  They don't even have a TER board! And isn't their state moto "The blow me state"?

It injected money into the communities that allowed them to reach, if not financial parity, then a minimum level of wealth to demand that they be treated honorably.

The same thing has happened with Indians and casinos. After years of struggling as an underclass, looking hopeless, they are finally advancing.

I would put it to you that the main reason why Blacks can't inject money in their communities through the drug trade is that the policing has just been much more successful.

And no, I'm not stating with this that drugs should be legalized as a form of affirmative action, I'm saying only that thinking through hard work ethnic groups all advance eventually in the US is simply unobservant.

Here are a couple updated links that anyone interesting in the cause of the housing crisis should look at. The original were removed because the background music was "Burning down the house" by the talking heads, and of course there were compaints.  

interesting and well done videos, just lousy music now.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NU6fuFrdCJY&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1RZVw3no2A4&feature=iv&annotation_id=event_986162