Democrats Police State Spying on Citizens

We have spent the past 7 years listening to Democrats constantly squeal that the Bush administration has destroyed the rights of innocent citizens through the application of sensible anti-terrorism surveillance tactics. The New York Times even went to far as to publish the result of illegal leaks regarding an effective electronic program the result of which was to cause the program to be shut down. And one interesting fact of all of this is that none of these stories ever have a victim. Even when one is manufactured and they go to the courts, the courts throw them out as having no standing (ie they haven't been harmed).

But now, we have a clear case of the government invading an individual's privacy in an effort to cause them harm. From the Columbus Dispatch:

Vanessa Niekamp said that when she was asked to run a child-support check on Samuel Joseph Wurzelbacher on Oct. 16, she thought it routine. A supervisor told her the man had contacted the state agency about his case.

Niekamp didn't know she just had checked on "Joe the Plumber," who was elevated the night before to presidential politics prominence as Republican John McCain's example in a debate of an average American.

The senior manager would not learn about "Joe" for another week, when she said her boss informed her and directed her to write an e-mail stating her computer check was a legitimate inquiry.

The reason Niekamp said she was given for checking if there was a child-support case on Wurzelbacher does not match the reason given by the Ohio Department of Job and Family Services.

I have been following this story for a while. The manager responsible for this records search has contributed the maximum to Obama's campaign. The governor of the state of Ohio has already investigated and said nothing was done wrong based on what this woman said:

Director Helen Jones-Kelley said her agency checks people who are "thrust into the public spotlight," amid suggestions they may have come into money, to see if they owe support or are receiving undeserved public assistance.

Interesting policy. So, if the Bush administration saw and Arab man on television, it would be okay to investigate him because he was holding a sign at a pro-Obama event? Does anyone believe that Obama supporter would consider that Okay? They wouldn't. But in any case, that story is an outright fabrication. Because this is what the employee who was directed to do this search said:

Niekamp told The Dispatch she is unfamiliar with the practice of checking on the newly famous. "I've never done that before, I don't know of anybody in my office who does that and I don't remember anyone ever doing that," she said today.

This is a criminal violation of privacy directed by senior officials in the Democratic party against a citizen who asked Barack Obama a question that exposed his real views on redistribution of wealth. A question that not one reporter has ever had the guts to ask Obama. And in return, they illegally directed subordinates to use government records to attempt to destroy someone they determined was a political enemy. THAT is the definition of destruction of the protection of civil liberties. THAT is an outline of just exactly how a party in power could destroy the underlying fabric of our country. And THAT is just okay with Democrats.

Read the entire article here.

---