Where are all those privacy-rights liberals now that the annointed one has announced the creation of yet another “czar,” who will have the totally open-ended power to “protect” the nation’s computers and keep them secure?…

Bondage. Bondage picpost. Breast bondage. Free bondage videos. Pantyhose bondage….

Amateur. Amateur sex video. Amateur radio. Amateur creampie. Amateur curves. Freacky amateur. Free amateur videos. Amateur video sex….

Rape stories. Rape sex. Rape fantasy. Rape pics. Date rape drug. Date rape….

It’s just curiousity. Would it be if talk radio was shut down? Talk radio AND the “rightwing” Internet? Talk radio, Internet and coming for our guns? Attempts to limit free speech in churches? Legalization of 14 million people who broke the law to be here during 10%-plus unemployment?

Let me be clear that I personally still believe the only moral way to fix this is in the ballot box in November 2010, not with revolution. I’m in no way advocating it. I’m just wondering when people would consider that line crossed that changes their minds.

Jules adds:

You know, if it was the Bush administration, I’d be more inclined to trust them. They sought extraordinary wartime powers, and used them to prosecute the war on terror. Never abused them, though, despite all the squawking.

Besides the fact that it’s ridiculous to say that the Bush admin never abused their power grabs, I dont get this logic at all.

Once one administration seizes power that it doesnt deserve, it sets a precedent that future administrations will also use.

I never understood why the Right was so willing to go along with the Bush/Cheney power grabs when it seemed so clear that they were setting up a future Democratic administration to use all the same tricks. If you’re not okay with Obama (or Hillary Clinton or any other Democratic politician) wielding particular powers, you shouldnt be okay with Bush / Cheney / McCain / Palin / Romney / Jindal / etc having them either.

And the same is true for the left. I wouldnt like it if a Republican president had this unconstitutional power, so I dont like it when Obama tries it either.

Jules Crittenden is explicitly saying that he believes in the rule of man over the rule of law. I say that if the law is no good (and I think this law is no good), then it doesnt matter which man is in power to use it.

You know, if it was the Bush administration, I’d be more inclined to trust them. They sought extraordinary wartime powers, and used them to prosecute the war on terror. Never abused them, though, despite all the squawking.

Never mind that this is hopelessly wrong. Ignore the torture, the illegal spying, the illegal imprisonment of American citizens, and all the illegal expansions of executive branch power by Bush. The power you ceded to Bush was ceded to Obama. The power you give to (in your mind) the most benevolent of administrations, you give to the most harmful.

This proposed law is merely the next logical step following Bush’s 4th Amendment violations. The principle has been established that the executive branch can do anything, so long as it is vaguely protecting something related to national security.

Welcome to the Dawn Patrol, our daily roundup of information on the War on Terror and other topics – from the MilBlogs and various sources around the world. If you’re a blogger, you can join the conversation. If you link to any of these stories, add a…

This is no “war on terror”, this is war on the American Citizens via our Federal Government!!!

They do not need to invade our privacy to protect government computer systems form cyber threats…