How much evidence should the U.S. government be obliged to show before it kills you? None, according to the Obama administration.H/T to Claire.
And how much evidence of your wrongdoing should the government be obliged to possess before officially targeting you for killing? That’s a secret, according to the president’s team. If judges force the government to answer that question, the terrorists will win.
[...]
If Obama gets away with this power-grab, the rhetoric for the 2012 race for the White House should be retuned. Instead of listening to candidates compete based on the number of new benefits they promise to lavish upon voters, prudent citizens will focus on which presidential candidate seems least likely to kill them or members or their family. We might hear campaign slogans like “Vote for Smith: he won’t have you killed unless all of his top advisers agree you deserve to die.” Unfortunately, as with other campaign promises, there will be no way for voters to compel politicians to honor their pledges.
The scaffolding is coming down on Notre Dame de Paris
30 minutes ago
2 comments:
Bovard does a great job, as usual, but then we expect that from him.
What I find interesting is hearing the same conclusions coming from a much less likely source: the jilted progressive.
Yes, tickles my fancy, I quit voting a long time ago,realizing as I did that it was the definition of insanity. But if you vote, then one should vote for the vermin who is less likely to kill you arbitrarily. Just think how rabidly angry that truth would make the typical voter. Especially since, even they, if only subconsciously realize the vermin lie.
This is like being in some nightmare.
Post a Comment