And when faced with the challenges that liberty entails, well, we just have to cut back on that scary, scary liberty.
Gabriel Malor has his thoughts.
Does the President of the United States really believe that technologies that put more information in the hands of the public (and the voters) impede "empowerment" and "emancipation"? I hope not, but let's face it; Leftism has always relied on a certain ignorance. Certainly his speechwriter must have seen similarities between these statements and the most well-known work of political fiction of the twentieth century.
Just this year alone, the President attempted (and succeeded) in rushing through healthcare reform without allowing the true costs to be told. And then they were well on their way to an inquisition of the major corporations who started mentioning the costs. He and the Democrats now face enormous backlash precisely because the technologies that he bewails—blogs and talk radio—empowered us to discover and share the costs of ObamaCare.
For Obama, the engines of argument have become as objectionable as argument itself. The President laments that technology "exposes us to all kinds of arguments", a curious complaint from someone with as much education as Obama. He says this is putting pressure on our country. But preserving "all kinds of arguments" was considered so important for the United States that the principle was enshrined in the First Amendment!
Here's Roger L. Simon's thoughts.
Let’s leave aside the little lie here – you can “know how to work” an iPod and and iPad literally by turning them on and Obama is a known Blackberry user in the first place – and examine the disinformation cum self-pity inherent in his statement. Yes, “some of the craziest claims can quickly claim traction,” but they can be more easily debunked than ever before. Of considerably more significance, in depth information on all issues of public policy are more quickly accessible to the average citizen than ever in history.
Take only one example, which will be of importance in the coming weeks. John Kerry and Joe Lieberman (alas) are moving forward with some new version of cap-and-trade legislation. The enemy of this proposal is knowledge, now accessible to all on the Internet. We can find out details, actual facts, on the science of global warming, or what purports to be the science, in minutes and begin to analyze those facts for ourselves. The iPad is just another device that makes this easy.
Obama, however, comes from a top-down, hierarchical political tradition where elites make policy for the common people, while pretending to themselves they are doing it for the benefit of the downtrodden. No wonder he is threatened by information technology, except where it can be turned to his advantage (as in fund-raising for his recent campaign).
In short, Obama is angry that the people don't "know their place"
Mr. Simon is compeltely correct, Obama, and the greater left, fear the fracturing of the "top down model".
The whole of liberalism seems to have become a series of rules. They are the ones that decide what you can: eat, drive, drink, smoke, shoot, use for medical treatment, and now read.
This is all precepted on the idea that the common person cannot run their lives well enough. That they need government help and regulation in every little detail. Whether it's for their own good or for the "greater" good, the message is "Shut up and do what your betters tell you to do."
Meanwhile Obama's Attorney General thinks that the Miranda warning is too restrictive.
Attorney General Eric Holder said that Congress should “give serious consideration” to updating the Miranda warning which requires law enforcement officials to inform suspects of their rights – including the right to remain silent.
Glen Reynolds quips:
Ah, remember all that talk about the “lawless Bush Administration” trampling civil rights, and the fierce moral urgency of change? Well, if you believed that stuff when they were peddling it. . . hey, rube!
Obama and his team have sold out on Iraq, Afghanistan, the Patriot Act, Gitmo, military tribunals, health care reform, financial reform, DADT and offshore drilling, so what’s the big deal about throwing Miranda into the pile? And by the way, what is the ‘new threat’ Holder is talking about?”
Well they're not willing to name the real threat.
But they sure like making hay about using these scares and threats to go after your freedoms.
Don't worry, it's only terrorists that will get the special Miranda warning, and only terrorists that can't buy guns. Just like how RICO is only used against organized crime.