California's Problem--and America's (RESTORED)

NOTICE: I don't know what happened to this post but this is the last time that I'm going to compose a post without saving it in Word or some other external word processing program.  Will post it again.

RESTORED POST:

Los Angeles Times:

How do you think conservative talk radio has affected the Legislature’s work?

Karen Bass (D-CA), Speaker of the California Assembly:

The Republicans were essentially threatened and terrorized against voting for revenue. Now [some] are facing recalls. They operate under a terrorist threat: “You vote for revenue and your career is over.” I don’t know why we allow that kind of terrorism to exist. I guess it’s about free speech, but it’s extremely unfair.

(Why is it that the innately tyrannical always whine about “unfairness?”)

The United States Constitution, Amendment One: 

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

(All emphasis mine.)

There’s something happening here, a process I call the “Coconut Treatment” and it most certainly is not a new process.  It’s as old as the Garden itself; a recasting of roles, of characteristics and of characters.  It's where good becomes evil and evil, good. Where exercising one's rights under the Constitution and under the precepts of Natural Law becomes "terrorism."  It’s a pretense meant to undergird a pretext for…something.  Wait and watch.

(Thanks to Ed Morrissey who notes that the LA Times interviewer failed to challenge the Speaker’s monstrous assertion.) 

Comments

[Paul_In_Houston]

The Republicans were essentially threatened and terrorized against voting for revenue. Now [some] are facing recalls. They operate under a terrorist threat: “You vote for revenue and your career is over.” I don’t know why we allow that kind of terrorism to exist. I guess it’s about free speech, but it’s extremely unfair.

Lovely.

We hire a person (by voting) to represent us. If he fails, or refuses, to do so, we fire him (by voting for someone else).

That's terrorism?

George Orwell would be impressed.

(I don't know if that last line was worth it; I fear half the people I aimed it at would reply, "WHO?")

-

[Buford Gooch]

This isn't even surprising. The standard political answer to people who disagree with them is, "Then you are a terrorist." I can't remember which state, but some Attorney General had a blogger investigated for terrorism because said blogger criticized the AG.