Don Surber has an interesting and disturbing article, "Obama to Restrict Travel", which fits in with this other article: “How wrong and simple-minded our definition of freedom is today”. Short excerpts from both below:
For some time I have maintained that the purpose of the TSA is to discourage airline travel for the middle class. Security has nothing to do with humiliating women, grannies and children before they board the airplane. The multiple checkpoints that people must pass have drastically changed the airport experience into something Stalinistic. Now the Soviet experience may expand to restricting overseas travel — the price of passports rose dramatically after 9/11 — in the name of collecting income taxes. Indeed, interstate travel may face restrictions as well.
Kurt Nimmo of Info Wars reported, “Senator Barbara Boxer’s MAP-21 (Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act) is headed to the House after clearing the Senate last month. Boxer’s bill allows the federal government to revoke the passports of citizens the IRS claims owe taxes.”
On a whim.
All the IRS has to do is accuse you of not paying your taxes.
Kurt Nimmo based this on a report in the Daily Economist, which noted, “There is no requirement that the tax payer be guilty of or even charged with tax evasion, fraud, or any criminal offense — only that the citizen is alleged to owe the IRS back taxes of $50,000 or more.” (continue reading)
For many years now, American citizens have been slowly giving up their freedoms. This is not by accident, this is intentional. But the progressives/liberals think we are not giving up our freedoms fast enough. Enter the second article by Don Surber, where he quotes an article by Michael Tomasky of The Daily Beast, questioning our right to eat what we want to eat (the government knows what's best for you).
... Now on to this, “and no, I don’t want to pass laws mandating the eating of broccoli. But I do want us to understand how wrong and simple-minded our definition of freedom is today. Any time the government appears to be suggesting some program aimed at getting people to do something that is obviously good for themselves — buying health insurance, not eating a bucket of popcorn big enough that two cats could screw in it — a certain number of idiots jump up and cry ‘Ha! Nanny state! Taking away my freedom!’ This, according to that Times article, is what the Obama administration feared Fox and Glenn Beck would do if it issued too many new FDA rulings.” [snip]
But the nut of the column is this, “Eating anything you want isn’t a definition of freedom. It’s just indulgence. And it says something depressing about our country that it is permitted to masquerade as the former.”
Michael Tomasky had the temerity to write, “I do want us to understand how wrong and simple-minded our definition of freedom is today.”
Once again, the liberal argument is: You’re stupid. (read it all)
Get all that? You are nothing more than a bunch of cattle, that need to be herded from one check point to another, stripped of your clothes, your dignity, willing to give up your freedoms and possibly Passports, and you are to stupid to be allowed to choose what foods you eat.
Which brings me to the following video and article from Hyscience:
Scary? Indeed, that is if you value your liberty and the freedoms guaranteed in the Constitution that Obama now has the power to 'slowly, slowly, destroy at his will (but promises never to use - and we're suppose to just 'trust him' and future presidents?).
How do you overturn fundamental American rights without forcing people into the streets with protest signs, or even rifles? By doing it slowly... slowly... Bill Looks at how the Affordable Care Act and the National Defense Authorization Act threaten our First and Fifth Amendment rights and how both parties are slowly taking away the protections that guard us from the Ring of Power. (continue reading)
Something to think about.