Free Speech is ‘Unhealthy’
April 22nd, 2009 - Written by Joey
So says David Axelrod of the Obama Administration:
Senior White House adviser David Axelrod on Sunday suggested the “Tea Party” movement is an “unhealthy” reaction to the tough economic climate facing the country.
Axelrod was asked on CBS’s “Face the Nation” about the “spreading and very public disaffection” with the president’s fiscal policies seen at the “Tea Party” rallies around the country last week.
“I think any time you have severe economic conditions there is always an element of disaffection that can mutate into something that’s unhealthy,” Axelrod said.
Can you imagine if someone from Dubya’s cabinet would have said that the anti-war protests (or any other leftist protests, for that matter) were ‘unhealthy’?
Peaceably assembling in order to voice an opinion on any matter of national significance is what makes this country great…whether you agree with those protesting or not. And when a high-ranking official in Federal government starts deciding what free speech is acceptable, that’s when you need to start getting worried.
I remember hearing an argument from a leftist while Bush was still in office. He explained how Homeland Security could be used against the people of this nation, and depending on who was in power, it could get ugly if those in power were tyrannical and intent on pushing through their agenda and eliminating those who got in their way. Although I rarely agree with leftists, his points made a lasting impression on me.
(Thankfully, Bush wasn’t profiling anti-war protestors as ‘domestic terrorists’ under the umbrella of Homeland Security. We got lucky.)
When people give so much power to the Federal government–regardless of who is in office–they miss the big picture. When ‘their guy’ is in office, it’s completely acceptable since the agenda they are pushing at the moment is something they agree with. But what they don’t consider is that when ‘the other guy’ takes over (a guy who could be a tyrant intent on silencing dissent), the ultimate power that was given to the previous leader is passed along to the new one…and the new guy may not be so accepting of having his agenda questioned by the people.
No matter where you find yourself in the political spectrum, you have to realize that a government that is big enough to give you whatever you want is big enough to take it all away. This is why I’m not a Bush fan. The way George W. Bush grew the size and spectrum of Federal power is something I’ll never forgive him for. The Department of Homeland Security is now being used to target and profile so-called ‘domestic terrorists’. If you read the criteria, you’ll find that stay-at-home moms in the suburbs and small business owners on Main Street USA are now considered a ‘danger’ to the nation…and the media is all-too-willing to play along, as witnessed at the Chicago Tea Party when the CNN reporter brazenly dismissed average Americans’ concern with the growth of Federal power.
This is why we need to think beyond the ‘right now’ and concentrate on what this country was founded on. Limited government is the only way to ensure freedom for the people of this nation. ALL people. Not just the ones you happen to agree with at the time.
April 22nd, 2009 at 5:49 am
Well said!
April 23rd, 2009 at 11:37 am
I could not agree with you more. The reporter at CNN claimed it was Fox News and right wing extremist. Pelosi said that it was astroturf and nothing but the rich trying to hang on to the Bush tax cuts. What they fail to point out is they may be putting twenty bucks in the left pocket of the working class all the while they are taking two hundred out of their back pockets, through cigarette taxes,alcohol taxes and carbon taxes. Yes they are fighting for the working class, Right? I have always found myself at odds with the ACLU, they have a little program that condemns the national Id which was part of the Patriot act but it equally applies to the national health database and socialized medicine.
http://aclu.org/pizza/