Missouri Governor Blunt Condemns Intimidation Tactics by Obama Supporters

Recently, top prosecutors in Missouri announced they would sue anyone who criticized Obama using lies or misleading statements. In reaction, Governor blunt has condemned the approach.

St. Louis County Circuit Attorney Bob McCulloch, St. Louis City Circuit Attorney Jennifer Joyce, Jefferson County Sheriff Glenn Boyer, and Obama and the leader of his Missouri campaign Senator Claire McCaskill have attached the stench of police state tactics to the Obama-Biden campaign.

“What Senator Obama and his helpers are doing is scandalous beyond words, the party that claims to be the party of Thomas Jefferson is abusing the justice system and offices of public trust to silence political criticism with threats of prosecution and criminal punishment.

“This abuse of the law for intimidation insults the most sacred principles and ideals of Jefferson. I can think of nothing more offensive to Jefferson’s thinking than using the power of the state to deprive Americans of their civil rights.

There are so many things disturbing about this story it is difficult to know where to begin.

1. Why are only misleading ads about Obama to be prosecuted? What about misleading ads about McCain? Of course the answer is obvious. But the abuse of power in this situation is frightening.
   
   
2. They don't want to sue for outright slanderous statements--they want to sue for misleading ones. While not ethical, misleading statements are sort of a basis for all political campaigns. Both side use them and they use them all the time. Recently I posted about Obama threatening to sue TV stations that ran NRA ads that painted Obama in a negative light. Sarah commented on that post:
   
   What I think is MORE dangerous about this, is Obama threatening to sue the TV stations. Does he really want to go down that slippery slope with the media? Suing entities protected under Constitutional freedoms? That is a can of worms I would not particularly wish to open...
   
   What is scary here is that Obama seems to have no problem opening this can of worms. Suing TV stations. Suing people for, seemingly, "not approving of Obama". Outright slander is one thing. Misleading statements is another entirely.
   
   
3. What part of the Bill of Rights is actually meaningful to Obama and his most rabid supporters? Not freedom of the press, as TV stations are targets. Not freedom of religion, that is just something bitter people cling to. Not the right to bear arms, he's been pro gun control his entire career. This has gone from a one time incident or viewpoint to a scary precedent.
   

If candidate Obama feels he deserves this much protection from criticism, how would President Obama act? The liberatrian side of me hopes that we never have to find out.