Part 1: One-Party Rule: Threat to Liberty--From Small Town America to Washington, D.C.

RFFM.org ^ | May 7, 2009 | Daniel T. Zanoza

[Daniel T. Zanoza]

... I formed Republicans For Fair Media (now RFFM.org) nearly 20 years ago, in an effort to encourage fairness and objectivity in the dominant press. Originally hailing from Chicago, this was a daunting task. That city, located in the nation's heartland, illustrated perfectly how one-Party rule left many individuals who held differing political and social views from those in power disenfranchised. Unfortunately, the mainstream media in Chicago left many stories regarding the moral and legal function of government unaddressed. This is a natural process which, in part, is due to human failings. In some cases, a journalist had little chance to survive for very long if he or she bucked the status quo in the Windy City.

In reality, the protections granted the Fourth Estate within the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution were left to fall by the wayside and those who suffered from this lapse in journalistic objectivity were the people of Chicago themselves.

In 2004, I moved to a small town in Central Illinois. For now, the name of that town isn't important. Let's call it Anywhere, U.S.A. However, to date my experience in Anywhere, U.S.A. is distressingly reminiscent of the political failings of one-Party government which I encountered while living in Chicago...

[who_would_fardels_bear]

For some time now we have had a one party system: the party of bigger and bigger government.

Some of them call themselves "republican", while others call themselves "democrat".

It's like the difference between teams in the NFC and teams in the AFC.

What we really need to do is support the reporting of news that validates a conservative political philosophy.

Pretty much every news story that gets through to the front page can be supported by either a typical democrat or a typical republican these days.

[ex-snook]

Right that one party rule for the first 6 years of Bush sure screwed up the country.

[OneWingedShark]

Actually he is right on some counts. A few weeks ago, the city police came onto the property where my mother and siblings were, with their weapons drawn, looking for me. I was not there at the time, but later foind out that one police officer, upon being asked what he was doing, said he was looking for me... but when my mom asked again, the officer unsnapped the holster-flap of his gun.

{Do you see any problems here yet?}

My mother called me and so I went to see what was going on, and fortunately, there was an officer whom I know from my national guard unit, that I could talk with.

I asked what had happened and he told me there’d been a 911 call and that people were concerned about me because I’d been wearing a gun. (Funny thing, I live in an open-carry state... I could wear three or four handguns in their holsters, and have a rifle and shotgun slung to my shoulders LEGALLY.)

But what disturbs me about this whole incident are the following:
— The 911 cal, made by someone who was not near me temporally or spatially.
— That the officers made an unwarranted search of the property for me.
— That an officer threatened my mother with a deadly weapon.
and
— That the idiots initially came in guns drawn when my siblings were outside playing.

In other words, it shows me:
1) A complete lack of due process.
2) A near-complete disregard for citizens.
3) A disturbing amount of trust put into a 911 caller, who, it turns out abused the 911-call. (Isn’t that illegal?)
4) The complete lack of involving me in things BEFORE the shit-hit-the-fan.

Yes, there are other factors, several other social-circles that I need to investigate... but this is just SHIT, overgrown & overblown rumor, that honestly could have ended VERY badly. (Under both color of law, and color of office.)