MD, your use of fascist and communist metaphors is too much for me to untangle in a blog comment. In one sentence, Obama is “Der Obama” who uses Gestapo tactics (both fascism references). But his ultimate end is a “totalitarian leftist state” (communism reference).

Or perhaps this is evidence of Obama’s evil genius — he will use fascist means toward a communist end. Obama is in turns Hitler and Stalin. Intriguing to say the least. Of course, we should expect nothing less from the anti-Christ.

April 15th, 2009 1:14 PM Eastern
JUDGE ANDREW NAPOLITANO: Six Things You Should Know About the Homeland Security Report on ‘Rightwing Extremism’
By Judge Andrew Napolitano
FOX News Senior Judicial Analyst

Homeland Security Warns of Rise in Right-Wing Extremism

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) report entitled “Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment”, dated April 7, 2009, which I have read, is apparently an unclassified summary of a larger classified report.

1. The summary contains few proper names, has no footnotes of any significance, lists very few sources, and is drafted with a prejudice against anyone who criticizes the role of the federal government in our lives today. It lumps together in its definition of “rightwing extremism” hate groups, anti-government groups, and single issue groups “such as opposition to abortion or immigration.”

My guess is that the sentiments revealed in the report I read are the tip of an iceberg that the DHS would prefer to keep submerged until it needs to reveal it. This iceberg is the heavy-hand of government; a government with large and awful eyes, in whose heart there is no love for freedom, and on whose face there is no smile.

2. The document itself cautions the reader that the document is “not to be released to the public, the media, or other personnel who do not have a valid need-to-know without prior approval” of the DHS. The document refers to itself as one of a series of intelligence assessments intended to “deter, prevent, preempt, or respond to terrorist attacks against the United States.”

3. The thrust of this report is that in the present environment of economic instability, returning military veterans, those who fear of the loss of Second Amendment-protected rights, those threatened by an African-American president, and those who fear “Jewish ‘financial elites’” could all be a fertile breeding ground for groups whose power and ideas the government hates and fears. The document is essentially a warning for DHS and FBI officials to be on the look-out for rootless persons looking for the comfort of groups as they may be a danger to American security.

4. The summary (unclassified) document is terrifying. One can only imagine what is contained in the classified version. This document runs directly counter to numerous U.S. Supreme decisions prohibiting the government from engaging in any activities that could serve to chill the exercise of expressive liberties. Liberties are chilled, in constitutional parlance, when people are afraid to express themselves for fear of government omnipresence, monitoring, or reprisals. The document also informs the reader that Big Brother is watching both public and private behavior.

5. The whole purpose of the First Amendment is to guarantee open, broad, robust debate on the policies and personnel of the government. The First Amendment presumes that individuals — NOT THE GOVERNMENT — are free to choose what they believe and espouse, what they read and say, and with whom they associate in public and in private. The writers of this abominable report are particularly concerned with the expression of opinions that might be used to fuel ideas that challenge federal authority or favor state and local government over the federal government. Unfortunately, legislation passed during the past eight years gives the DHS and the FBI the tools to monitor everything from a telephone conversation to the keystrokes used on a personal computer without a warrant issued by a federal judge.

6. My guess is that the sentiments revealed in the report I read are the tip of an iceberg that the DHS would prefer to keep submerged until it needs to reveal it. This iceberg is the heavy-hand of government; a government with large and awful eyes, in whose heart there is no love for freedom, and on whose face there is no smile.

_________________

Just because some “hate” groups used the term “states rights” does not mean the issue of the Federal Government’s ever-increasing power cannot be discussed for fear of being called a racist. Let’s call it “Federalism” instead of states’ rights.

The point of my previous post is that: (a) Obama is using the power of the Federal government to supress his legitimate political opponents; and (b) Gestapo-like tactics such as these are not good. I thought he was supposed to bring us all together and end all partisan behavior just by the power of his being in office.

In 1954, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Brown v. Board of Education declaring that our separate but equal educational system was unconstitutional.

Those who opposed integration argued, among other things, that it was not for the U.S. Supreme Court to decide the integration/segregation issue because that was a state issue. Thus, the term “states’ rights” became synonymous with the effort to keep schools segregated. For decades now, radical racist groups — many of whom incite and commit violence against minorities — rally around the notion of “states’ rights.” It’s become nothing but shorthand for “let us be racist agitators.”

MD/Zeek, this has nothing to do with Washington, Adams, or Jefferson or the 10 Amendment or grandstanding governors yakking about the 10th Amendment. It has everything to do with groups hell bent on terrorizing minorities and those who get in the way of terrorizing minorities.

Further, unless I missed a news story, no pro-abortion group has killed a pro-lifer. However, numerous pro-lifers have killed doctors and staff members of abortion clinics. Same with immigration. I don’t know of any advocates of more relaxed immigration policies killing or maiming those who oppose more relaxed immigration policies. But I’ll be happy to provide you with links to stories about hate groups killing immigrants.

If someone wants to get together with his buddies and bitch about black people, I’ll support their ability to do that even though I find the conduct reprehensible. But if they want to get together and talk about committing violent acts or inciting others to commit violent acts, then that’s a different deal altogether. And I believe that whether it’s whites plotting against minorities or minorities plotting against whites.

Zeek, I know I’m just a mental midget — and apparently liberal, too — but let’s get “back to the letter and spirit of the Constitution”?

Those are two diametrically opposed philosophies of the Constitution. How do you propose we get back to both? That’s like saying, “We need more capitalism and communism in this country.”

The letter of the law philosophy is known as strict constructionism. The Constitution says what it says and nothing more. The spirit of the law is the “living document” philosophy that sees the Constitution as a malleable document that adapts to present day circumstances.

It would be pretty hard to get back to 2 approaches that are mutually exclusive.

Here’s a question:
How can Miss. be so far behind 46 or 47 other states economically, one of poorest states in the nation, yet have one of, if not THE highest auto license tag rates(which are going UP by the way)???????????

C’mon Wit—that’s 19th century talk. As you know, the US Constitution gives the Federal Government very specific and very limited powers. Beacause the Founding Fathers were worried about a powerful national government, the first ten amendments limit the power of the federal government and give the people certain rights with the Tenth Amendment stating:

“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

Our history has seen the power of the Federal Government continuously grow at the expense of the states and the people.

The “warning” issued above by our new savior Der Obama is to watch out for “groups that reject federal authority in favor of state or local authority”. That would include the Governor of Texas. See article:
_______________
Gov. Perry Backs Resolution Affirming Texas’ Sovereignty Under 10th Amendment
HCR 50 Reiterates Texas’ Rights Over Powers Not Otherwise Granted to Federal Government
April 09, 2009
AUSTIN – Gov. Rick Perry today joined state Rep. Brandon Creighton and sponsors of House Concurrent Resolution (HCR) 50 in support of states’ rights under the 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

“I believe that our federal government has become oppressive in its size, its intrusion into the lives of our citizens, and its interference with the affairs of our state,” Gov. Perry said. “That is why I am here today to express my unwavering support for efforts all across our country to reaffirm the states’ rights affirmed by the Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. I believe that returning to the letter and spirit of the U.S. Constitution and its essential 10th Amendment will free our state from undue regulations, and ultimately strengthen our Union.”
________________

The warning also says “It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single-issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration”.

Ask yourself why organizations that oppose abortion or immigration would be terrorist groups while organizations that support abortion or immigration would not be terrorist groups.