“I am not a dictator”.
Because…a dictator would seize the press and have them bury any unfavorable story and write puff pieces about him.
Because…a dictator would send the government’s agents to harass, intimidate and punish anyone who dared to write a negative story.
Because…a dictator would send the government’s revenue agents to harass, intimidate and investigate citizen’s tax filings.
Because…a dictator would declare war on a country without seeking approval of his government.
Because…a dictator would attempt to seize the arms with which the citizenry might protect itself.
Because…a dictator would run guns to drug cartels and then have his Department of Justice cover up the fact, eventually granting executive privilege to cease the inquiry.
Because…a dictator would let his own ambassador die a bloody and brutal death in order to callously gauge his own reelection impact.
Because…a dictator would paint Catholics, Jews, Mormons and Christians as “terrorist threats” in order to have his army trained to treat them with suspicion and disdain.
Because…a dictator would pass a massive “redistribution” hoax having his lawyers call it a tax, while he simultaneously denies it is any such thing.
Because…a dictator would suggest that he could drop a missile on the head of any citizen he damn well pleases.
Because…a dictator can force the Catholic religion to reject their own tenets of their faith in order to compel compliance with his legislative fiats.
Because…a dictator can shut off access to the residence he occupies under the phony guise of “sequestration” costs.
Malevolence often comes disguised as benevolence. Totalitarianism often comes disguised as populism. Leftism comes disguised as liberalism. And tyranny…doesn’t appear at your doorstep suddenly. You invite it in with open arms, until one day you realize what you have done.
And, by then…it is too late.
Spot on comment, very well said!
Piers Morgan is an insufferable twit but it looks like he might be having and “ah-ha” moment of clarity….
Piers Morgan: “I think what the IRS did is bordering on tyrannical behavior. I think what the Department of Justice has done to the AP is bordering on tyrannical behavior.”
Attorney Journal Eric Holder faced over four hours of questioning on the IRS, AP probe, Benghazi and other topics from members of the House Judiciary Committee on Wednesday.
Attorney General Eric Holder said that the investigation into the IRS’s targeting of conservative groups will not be limited to the tax-exempt unit in the agency’s Ohio field office.
House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte’s (R-Va.) opening statement was interrupted by a Democrat on the committee.
Rep. Melvin Watt (D-N.C.) held his grandchild during his questioning of Eric Holder in front of the House Judiciary Committee on Wednesday.
Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.) said that the Justice Department secretly obtaining the Associated Press’s phone records impaired the First Amendment.
Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) and Attorney General Eric Holder sparred during the House Judiciary Committee’s hearing on Wednesday. Holder called Issa’s conduct “shameful” and “unacceptable.”
And Eric Holder is seized by political quicksand.
The Wall Street Journal reports that the IRS will face a criminal probe related to disclosures that it singled out opposition political groups for illegal harassment:
Attorney General Eric Holder disclosed the probe during a scheduled news conference on health care fraud. He also revealed that that Deputy Attorney General Jim Cole ordered the seizure of reporters’ phone records, an act which has ignited a firestorm of controversy. He justified the action based on national security concerns:
The subpoenas covered a four-week period over two months around the time AP wrote the story about an alleged conspiracy to detonate an underwear bomb aboard a U.S.-bound airliner. The plot was foiled early on because the alleged bomber was a mole for a foreign-intelligence service working against al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula.
A press leak that compromises national security is certainly serious business. But the question of overreach remains to be answered. And then there is the broader issue: did the AP actually imperil the security effort, or did its disclosure of the plot imperil the Obama Administration’s narrative that the terror threat had basically gone away with the death of Osama bin Laden? In the rush to get maximum favorable publicity out of that event, the Administration spilled copious amounts of detail into the public square.