“Unique Circumstance”: Paving the Way for the Crushing of Dissent

h/t Hot Air, Protein Wisdom, Cold Fury, Libertysphere, Michelle Malkin, Washington Examiner, Jihad Watch.

FRONTAL ATTACK ON FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS!

A new White House policy on permissible lobbying on economic recovery and stimulus project has taken a decidedly anti-First Amendment turn. It’s a classic illustration of Big Government trying to control every aspect of a particular activity and in the process running up against civil liberty.

Check out this passage from a post on the White House blog by Norm Eisen, Special Counsel to the President on Ethics and Government Reform (emphasis added):

“First, we will expand the restriction on oral communications to cover all persons, not just federally registered lobbyists. For the first time, we will reach contacts not only by registered lobbyists but also by unregistered ones, as well as anyone else exerting influence on the process. We concluded this was necessary under the unique circumstances of the stimulus program.”

Further,

The key passage is the reference to expanding regulation from registered lobbyists to “anyone else exerting influence on the process. We concluded this was necessary under the unique circumstances of the stimulus program.”

This is the Camel’s nose under the tent…

Note that ANYONE, not just lobbyists, who attempts to influence process will be restricted from communicating their opinion if it is against Obama’s plans!

Just say, “Hell No!”

For the record, I hope this post is echoed to “exert influence on the process” of the economic recovery and stimulus project, which I object to as unconstitutional, undue interference of government in the private affairs of business without due process.

————————————–

Update: Charles Johnson says, “There is absolutely nothing wrong with this.”

Well, all-righty then, Chuckles.  If you say so.  Then again, you just may be the last one they throw into the shredder.

————————————–

Update 2:

USCitizen’s comment #194 on the LGF’ thread:

I noticed that Charles neglected to include the operative quote in his description of the white House post from Norm  Eisen, Special Counsel to the President on Ethics and Government Reform:

“First, we will expand the restriction on oral communications to cover all persons, not just federally registered lobbyists. For the first time, we will reach contacts not only by registered lobbyists but also by unregistered ones, as well as anyone else exerting influence on the process. We concluded this was necessary under the unique circumstances of the stimulus program.

Sounds like a Constitution-killer to me. Your mileage may vary, though.

[Comment #194 Deleted]

————————————–

Charles’ Response: #208 Charles

5/30/09 8:29:01 pm reply quote 1downupreport

re: #194 USCitizen

There’s a link right there. Clicking it leads to the White House post. Of course, if you’re too lazy to do that, then yeah, I’m trying to trick you. Glad to see you aren’t so easily fooled by my clever machinations.

————————————–

USCitizen’s response to Charles:

Response #256: Charles:

With all due respect, your synopsis of the issue omitted the crux of the argument the other posts were addressing. I did not see any comments or clarifications pointing out precisely what objectionable language was in the link, so I wanted to bring that to the commentors’ attention.

Perhaps they missed it.

Perhaps they did not read it.

I did.

[Comment #256 Deleted]

Other Responses:

5/30/09 8:39:15 pm  -3downup
USCitizen
This user is blocked.
Registered since: Jul 16, 2007 at 6:43 pm
No. of comments posted: 2

————————————–

303 Last Mohican

5/30/09 8:50:00 pm reply quote 1downupreport
re: #288 mich-again

Hello, and goooodbye.

And he got vaporized before I even had a chance to go check out his insane wingnut blog.

Oh well. Probably better that way. I already took my shower tonight.

————————————–

Looks like I’ve been O’Reilly’d at LGF. Not as much reasoned discourse there as I would have expected.

Were my two comments disrespectful or inflammatory in some way? It must be a gift, ‘cuz that wasn’t my intent.

You stay classy Chuckles. Nice bunch of friends you’ve made at your place, too.

————————————-

For Reference, this is LGF’s comment policy.  Did I do anything like this?

Comments are open and unmoderated, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Little Green Footballs.

Obscene, abusive, silly, or annoying remarks may be deleted, but the fact that particular comments remain on the site in no way constitutes an endorsement of their views by Little Green Footballs.

Posts that contain phone numbers, street addresses, email addresses or other personal information will also be deleted, as will posts that consist only of a variation on the word, “First!”

Comments that advocate violence will be cause for immediate banning with no appeal.

Disagreement and debate are welcome, but insults and abuse are not, and may cause your account to be blocked.

REMEMBER: posting comments at LGF is a privilege, not a right. Abuse that privilege, and your account will be blocked.