Obama supports taking DNA samples upon arrest, not conviction.

Josh Gerstein over at Politico sent Threat Level his piece underscoring once again President Barack Obama is not the civil-liberties knight in shining armor many were expecting.

Gerstein posts a televised interview of Obama and John Walsh of America’s Most Wanted. The nation’s chief executive extols the virtues of mandatory DNA testing of Americans upon arrest, even absent charges or a conviction. Obama said, “It’s the right thing to do” to “tighten the grip around folks” who commit crime.

I guess you can add this to the list along with warrantless wiretapping, the Patriot Act, the continued wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and all the other things that suddenly don’t concern liberals.

I wonder why we haven’t heard anything lately from the “Libertarians for Obama?”

The American left is very effective when it comes to keeping prayer out of public schools. One has to wonder if they will use their skills to stop this…

“LEWISTON — A national Muslim civil rights organization has filed a formal request with the Lewiston School Department to allow a middle school student to pray on school property. The group also wants Lewiston to modify existing policy and provide “constitutionally protected religious accommodation,” such as a designated prayer room.”

“The group has also requested the school department institute diversity training for school staff, and to ensure the middle-schooler won’t face retaliation because of her request to pray at the Lewiston Middle School.”

“According to the Washington, D.C.,-based Council on American-Islamic Relations, seventh-grader Nasra Aden had been routinely “praying discreetly during her free time or lunch break in a corner of a school hallway.” But, on Tuesday, CAIR asserts a teacher told Aden “never to pray on school property” after Aden was seen preparing to kneel in prayer in a corner of one of the hallways.”

“CAIR National Communications Director Ibrahim Hooper said Friday that if the Lewiston School Department did not address its four requests to allow prayer, modify school policy, institute training and protect Aden from retaliation, “we wouldn’t really have much choice but to take the case further” because “the student has the legal right and the constitutional right to pray in school in a manner that is not disruptive to the learning environment.”

Maine could learn a thing or two from Tennessee. Paging the ACLU…

“ASHLAND CITY, Tenn. (ABP) — Tennessee’s chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit Nov. 16 accusing the Cheatham County Board of Education of ignoring more than four decades of court decisions interpreting the separation of church and state.”

“The lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee, claims board members and the principals of two schools for years have endorsed and promoted religion through extracurricular activities like marching band, choir and sports; classroom instruction and related content; and graduation ceremonies and other school events.”

I sure hope the ACLU goes after CAIR for trying to provide “constitutionally protected religious accommodation” like prayer rooms in public schools. They wouldn’t want to be seen as hypocrites, would they?

The people of Maine should weigh in here, too. Will they be OK with their tax dollars being used to create “prayer rooms” for Muslims in their publicly funded schools?

Most likely, liberals will have no problem with any of this. Unless of course, Muslims in Maine suddenly want to put up Christmas Trees in the schools.

After all, that would be an outrage.

Obama’s Big Brother directive to his base that they should “snitch” on people who are opposed to ObamaCare may be against the law. Apparently, in 1974 we passed this annoying little thing called the Privacy Act. Of Arms and The Law Reports:

“5 US Code §552a(e)(7) commands that any Federal agency”

“(7) maintain no record describing how any individual exercises rights guaranteed by the First Amendment unless expressly authorized by statute or by the individual about whom the record is maintained or unless pertinent to and within the scope of an authorized law enforcement activity;”

“Persons posting to the web or sending emails are exercising First Amendment rights. I can’t see how gathering this information is expressly authorized by statute, nor within the scope of an LE activity. It doesn’t get much clearer than that.”

“I’d say there are glaring Privacy Act violations here. And the penalties, per §552a(i) include fines of up to $5,000, not only for gathering forbidden data, but for disclosing it or maintaining an undisclosed system.”

Evan Coyne Maloney was the first to raise this question:

“The Obama White House may be breaking the Privacy Act of 1974 by asking citizens to report “fishy” political speech.”

“One wonders, what constitutes “fishy” speech or “disinformation”? Is it anything that runs counter to what the White House wants you to think? And what, precisely, is the White House planning to do about someone who’s speech has been “flagged”?”

“I’m no lawyer, but it sure sounds like the White House is violating the law by asking people to snitch on their friends and neighbors for engaging in “fishy” political speech. Anyone want to try this one in court?”

Where is the outrage from the left on this? Where the hell is the damn ACLU???

Can you even IMAGINE if Bush/Cheney had done this?

There would be demands for investigations, endless news cycles in the media, lawsuits, marches, protests, etc.

So far? (sound of crickets chirping)

See Rush Limbaugh’s site for more on this.