Barack Obama, The One, The One Truth, The Intimidation, The Thug

We’ll put in context the latest Rezko news tomorrow. Sometime this week we’ll give some advice to Governor Sarah Palin regarding this week’s debate. This Sunday however, we will have a not so metaphysical discussion about the truth.

Yesterday, regarding this past Friday’s debate (which was pretty much of a bust as to numbers of viewers) we began to document just a very tiny few of Obama’s mistruths, distortions, and lies. Yesterday’s Obama Bin Lyin’, Again was a sort of follow up to our earlier Obama Bin Lyin’ in which we documented Obama’s attempts to hide even the most basic information about himself (more on this tomorrow).

We did not, in yesterday’s discussion, refer to “the bracelet incident” at the debate. We concentrated on Obama’s continuing lies about what he has said about ‘Pahkissthann” and other important issues of war and peace.

We did not write about it, but we thought Obama’s “bracelet” answer was canned and prepared by his Chicago thugs because they knew John McCain has a compelling story about a soldier and a bracelet McCain relates at campaign events and therefore the Chicago thugs had to provide Obama with something/anything to try to steal McCain’s thunder.

But it turns out “the bracelet incident” is yet another slimy Obama revealing “truth” and today we want to discuss “truth” and throw in a little Missouri.

Here is the ABC News account of “the bracelet incident”:

During Friday night’s presidential debate, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., mentioned the moment when the mother of a fallen soldier gave him a hero bracelet bearing her son’s name, Matthew Stanley. [snip]

Sen. Obama responded saying, “I’ve got a bracelet, too, from Sergeant – from the mother of Sergeant Ryan David Jopek, given to me in Green Bay. [snip]

In February 2008, Ryan’s mother Tracy and his sister Jessica traveled to Green Bay and waited in the cold for 45 minutes to give Obama her son’s bracelet. A campaign staffer arranged it so they could meet him.

“I didn’t get to say what I wanted to say. I just cried,” Tracy Jopek told the newspaper. “It wasn’t for anything but for him to know this is real, something he needed to know. . . I do believe (the war) needs to end, but I believe it needs to be done very carefully and very thoughtfully.” [snip]

But a month later, Ryan’s father Brian — who is no longer married to Tracy — told Wisconsin Public Radio that his ex-wife had misgivings about Obama wearing the bracelet and mentioning their son on the campaign trail. It seems as though just as Tracy Jopek supports Obama and wants to end the war, Brian Jopek has a different take on what should happen in Iraq and may be more inclined to support McCain.

After pointing out that he and Tracy are not married anymore, Brian says that “from what I understood from email exchanges with Tracy….she wanted to put a name, she wanted Sen. Obama to know Ryan’s name…She wasn’t looking to turn it into a big media event…She just wanted it to be something between Barack Obama and herself.” [snip]

She had told me that in an email that she had asked, actually asked Mr. Obama to not wear the bracelet anymore at any of his public appearances.”

Conservatives are now criticizing Obama for exploiting a fallen soldier whose mother has asked him to stop wearing the bracelet or mentioning her son’s name. I’m not sure what the reality is behind this story — I have a call into the Obama campaign and Tracy Jopek to find out more about this story, and will let you know what they say.

[Radio interview HERE]

Tracey Jopek wanted Obama to know Ryan Jopek’s name. Obama could not remember the name at the debate until he looked at the bracelet. The Jopek’s, at the very least one of the Jopeks, don’t want Obama to use Ryan Jopek’s memory for campaign purposes – Obama doesn’t care and continues to exploit Ryan Jopek for political advantage.

Put aside for a moment Obama not remembering Ryan Jopek’s name. Put aside for a moment Big Media protecting Obama on “the bracelet incident”. Put aside Obama clearly ignoring the wishes of the father of Ryan Jopek. What is the truth about this story? Is the mother of Ryan Jopek, not only the father, also clearly asking Obama to cease and desist exploiting her son? Jake Tapper of ABC News wrote I’m not sure what the reality is behind this story.

To us it seems fairly clear that at least one parent of Ryan Jopek does not want Obama to exploit Ryan Jopek’s death. What if a veteran’s group then, decided to do an advertisement attacking Barack Obama’s lack of character for exploiting Ryan Jopek’s death. What then?

Well, in Missouri, you would be in trouble. The Chicago thugs have gone MO.

In the Orwellian world of Big Blogs and Big Media, Obama’s Truth must become THE truth. Obama is “The One” according to Oprah and Big Blog boobs. Now, we have The One Truth, the only truth, the Obama Truth.

St. Louis City Circuit Attorney Jennifer Joyce and St. Louis County Circuit Attorney Bob McCulloch are the MO enforcers of The One Truth. They threaten to bring libel charges against those who dare take The One in vain.

Poor Big Pink. In Missouri we would be carted off to the Obama Detention Center.

Maybe, sitting in our Pink garb in our dank grey cell at the Obama Detention Center – as we await re-education to become one with The One’s Truth – we would appeal to Governor Blunt of Missouri. The Governor would doubtless help us, if he does not go “re-education” himself.

Gov. Blunt Statement on Obama Campaign’s Abusive Use of Missouri Law Enforcement

JEFFERSON CITY – Gov. Matt Blunt today issued the following statement on news reports that have exposed plans by U.S. Senator Barack Obama to use Missouri law enforcement to threaten and intimidate his critics.

“St. Louis County Circuit Attorney Bob McCulloch, St. Louis City Circuit Attorney Jennifer Joyce, Jefferson County Sheriff Glenn Boyer, and Obama and the leader of his Missouri campaign Senator Claire McCaskill have attached the stench of police state tactics to the Obama-Biden campaign.

“What Senator Obama and his helpers are doing is scandalous beyond words, the party that claims to be the party of Thomas Jefferson is abusing the justice system and offices of public trust to silence political criticism with threats of prosecution and criminal punishment.

“This abuse of the law for intimidation insults the most sacred principles and ideals of Jefferson. I can think of nothing more offensive to Jefferson’s thinking than using the power of the state to deprive Americans of their civil rights. The only conceivable purpose of Messrs. McCulloch, Obama and the others is to frighten people away from expressing themselves, to chill free and open debate, to suppress support and donations to conservative organizations targeted by this anti-civil rights, to strangle criticism of Mr. Obama, to suppress ads about his support of higher taxes, and to choke out criticism on television, radio, the Internet, blogs, e-mail and daily conversation about the election.

“Barack Obama needs to grow up. Leftist blogs and others in the press constantly say false things about me and my family. Usually, we ignore false and scurrilous accusations because the purveyors have no credibility. When necessary, we refute them. Enlisting Missouri law enforcement to intimidate people and kill free debate is reminiscent of the Sedition Acts – not a free society.”

Governor Blunt should have left out the “conservative” portion of his otherwise fine statement. Dear Governor Blunt, we are Democrats, mostly real Pinko, yet true Blue, yellow-dog type, progressive, believe in democracy Democrats. But we are not Obama Dimocrats. We are not conservatives politically or otherwise but we too are targets of the Chicago Thug Intimidation Machine.

Governor Blunt, understand that Obama wants to intimidate. The old FDR truth of we have nothing to fear but fear itself is turned on its head by Obama and his Chicago thugs. For Obama the purpose is fear, intimidation, the chilling effect.

Obama thugs threatened riots in Denver if The One was not chosen. Obama thugs intimidate critics and non-supporters by branding them “racists”. African-American Hillary Clinton supporters were threatened for daring to challenge the annointment of The One. (When Obama is called “The One” that too is somehow a slur, a dog-whistle to Book of Revelations’ fundamentalists.) No criticism of Obama, Governor Blunt, is to be tolerated. The Cult of The One will not allow it and intimidation is the key. Do not abandon us Pinkos Governor Blunt.

Obama has threatened radio stations and television broadcasters with lawsuits already. Obama has urged his apostles to engage in “get in their face” politics. Obama has organized tens of thousands of his followers to threaten broadcasters for airing advertisments he does not like.

Obama will intimidate in order to silence.

Can libel charges, or the threat of libel charges, be used to chill free speech? You bet they can. Barack Obama’s latest tactics are all-too-reminiscent of Britain’s libel tourism phenomenon, and of related efforts to use British libel law to censor political speech. [snip]

Can it happen here? Thanks to the Obama campaign, it already is happening. And don’t think American libel law, so much less plaintiff-friendly than British libel law, gives us a free pass. At the counterterrorism blog, Jeffrey Breinholt explains how even American libel laws can be used to intimidate and silence speech. As I point out in “Not Without a Fight,” what really protects free speech here in the United States is the value we place upon it, and the shame we would feel handling criticism by way of law suits. When it comes to silencing critics, on the other hand, the Obama campaign appears to have no shame. That augers poorly for the culture of free exchange. As Tocqueville reminds us, habits of the heart, even more than the law itself, stand as our most important protections against tyranny. If Obama continues to break one free-speech taboo after another, the law will surely follow.

So continued media silence on Obama’s intimidation tactics threatens not only the fairness of this election, but press freedom itself. Yet to defend the freedom of the right as if it were their own is something our left-leaning press has forgotten how to do.

The purpose for Obama is intimidation. Today, Obama intimidates those who oppose him. Eventually Obama will turn on his supporters and friends too.

Obama simply cannot be trusted. Obama cannot be trusted on any issue. Obama cannot be trusted by his friends. Obama cannot be trusted by his enemies. Obama cannot be trusted.

Obama cannot be trusted with our civil liberties. Obama just can’t be trusted. And that’s the truth.