• Front page
• Receive letters on your RSS reader

Gov. Bill Ritter’s panel on transportation finance reportedly decided against using global-positioning system technology to track where and when Colorado drivers take to the road and tax accordingly (“Panel says no to idea for tax on miles driven,” Aug. 25).
Commission members referenced the fact that “it could take years for citizens to get used to the idea that the government could keep track of what streets they drive on and when they drive.” Apparently, such Orwellian policy ideas aren’t restricted to science fiction or conspiracy theories.
Citizens, be vigilant! We could find ourselves like the frog who, through desensitization in an ever-hotter pot of water, is no less dead at full boil.

Christine Burtt, Denver

READER COMMENTS

Just tax gas - no surveillance needed.

yep ritter and all the dums need to go back to the drawing board to find another way to raise taxes. can never have to many taxes you know. we could have a lot of extra money if the state would stop giving away all the free services to the illigals. how many hundreds of millions would that save per year?

You may think me wrong but, bare with me a moment. Tyranny, like a long trip, starts with the first step. From the get go, I want to make it a clear that when I reference the smoking ban there is no intention to make that the issue, it is only used as an example, not an agenda driven arguement.

I hope I've been clear, now to the point. I have done research for a living and what I say in the following paragraphs, while argueable, is never the less a proveable contention.

The smoking ban movement began in earnest about twelve years ago. For purposes of keeping this on point, I will not go into the funding, the studies, who and what were behind that effort etc. The result of this movement is the point.

Whether you agree with the ban or not is immaterial to the issue. This movement was the first to regulate people's freedom of choice to use a legal substance by enacting a law restricting where it could legaly be done.

My consultant's and my research, independently done, both agree that it was after this movement started that other regulations and restrictions started to emerge concerning the many various freedoms we have taken for granted since the formation of our country.

In other words, the smoking ban movement spawned other movements to undermine our freedom by using the ages old method of falsifing the propaganda of the necessity of it by employing scare tactics , such as public health concerns, safety in the work place, the public welfare, orderly regulation of access, medical imperatives and the one stated here, regulation and tracking of travel, to mention just a few. All of which hide the real purpose which is to control the when, where, why and how you are allowed to do anything and everything in your life.

Don't focus on any one example because they all amount to the same thing, regardless of whether your personal beliefs agree or not with any of them, they all are restrictions of your freedom. It has been truthfully said that when one mans freedom is violated, everyone's freedom has been violated. Opinions can diagree about particulars but, the real issue is not what you like or don't like. It's what the over all effect is. And in this case, the effect is setting the stage for tyranny.

Where are all of the liberals that like to complain about wiretapping of the terrorists international phone calls? This is more of an invasion of our privacy that that program ever will be. This is a driect assault on rights to move about the country as we please because now big brother will really be watching over us.
And nothing but silence from those who scream about surveillance, mmm, II suppose it is because a Democratic Governor is proposing it that makes it alright in their weak minds.

Wait, somehow the "liberals" are to blame for wanting to increase surveillance when the panel decided that it WASN'T a good idea??? I'm a card-carrying member of the ACLU, and I agreee... this was NOT a good idea.

So why am I OK with the smoking ban? Because it regulates what people may or may not do in places of business. It does not track them in any way as they go about their daily activity. It does not involve constructing databases based on their political or religious opinions.

Regulating what goes on in businesses has always been a role of government. It's against the law to consume alcohol at a business that doesn't have a liquor license, and alcohol is legal for anyone age 21 or over to consume, just as cigarettes are legal for anyone age 18 or over to smoke. Are those opposed to the smoking ban working to overturn the unfair, pinko-Commie, nanny-state, do-gooder liquor bans? After all, those bans discriminate against business owners unable to get a liquor license. And think of the poor alcoholics, er, I mean, drinkers, forced to leave a restaurant just because drinking isn't allowed there. I think they may have common cause with the nicotine addicts, er, I mean, smokers.

Now, if they would just ban something I like to do, so that I can get extra breaks at work to go stand outside!

Greg you missed the point which I tried to avoid by explaining that smoking was not the issue but, zealots like you will cherry pick anything to get a point that you can make fun of those you do not agree with. It's about freedom of choice Greg, not your personal preferences and, using the juvenile tactic of insulting someone by using a slur word then immediately reverting to the right word is bush league at best. It is people like you that make progress in understanding impossible.

Allen Campbell
WHo are your consultants and where did you do research?
"This movement was the first to regulate people's freedom of choice to use a legal substance by enacting a law "...."My consultant's and my research, independently done, both agree that it was after this movement started that other regulations and restrictions started to emerge concerning the many various freedoms we have taken for granted since the formation of our country."
I seem to recall things like prohibition, gun control, Jim Crow, ...before this one.

OH but they did not affect Allen Campell, I guess, so they didn't happen. Hmmmmm.
AF

If you had the courage of your convictions you would not hide behind a no name post. And, maybe you have a problem in understanding what I say. I did not say the smoking ban was the first such government intervention, I said it was the one that spawned the movement to ban other things like, trans fats, which are ten times less dangerous than the saturated fats that they did not ban. Try to get the point before running your mouth off about something you don't understand.

And I don't think it's any of your damned business who my consultants are or where I've done research. If I told you, you would not believe it anyway. The validity of my statements stand until you can prove them wrong. Go ahead give it a try if you can muster up the smarts to do it.

Well, I'm a liberal and an ex-smoker who is decidedly against any kind of "GPS" tracking of my car's whereabouts. That's an invasion of my privacy, period.

As for the smoking ban, I'm against that, too. If there are so many people who stay home to avoid smoke, how come so many bars and restaurants (especially the mom and pops) are really struggling now? And how come the casinos got a free pass?

It was a stupid and unfair piece of legislation. And a bipartisan one, I might add.

oh goodie gregie is a card carring member of the aclu how nice. lets look at your childish statements.

Regulating what goes on in businesses has always been a role of government. WHAT KIND OF GOVERNMENT REGULATIONS ARE ON A WOODWORKING SHOP? I BELIEVE YOU ARE REFERING TO COMMUNISM AND NOT CAPITALISM. It's against the law to consume alcohol at a business that doesn't have a liquor license, NOW THIS IS ALL BS EXCEPT FOR THE ACLU. I CAN CONSUME ALL THE ALCOHOL I WANT AT MY BUSINESS AND SO CAN ANYONE IN MY BUSINEES IF I OFFER IT TO THEM WITH NO CHARGE.and alcohol is legal for anyone age 21 or over to consume, just as cigarettes are legal for anyone age 18 or over to smoke. Are those opposed to the smoking ban THE SMOKING BAN DISCRIMINATES AGAINST PERSONAL CHOICE. ALL THE NON SMOKERS SAID IT WOULD BE FOR A HEALTH ISSUE AND THAT THEY WOULD ENJOY GOING SOMEWHERE WITHOUT HAVING TO BREATH SMOKE. SO WE HAVE TO ACCOMIDATE THEM WILL EVERYWHERE, EVEN THE PLACE THEY WOULD NEVER GO, WITH SMOKE FREE, AND THEY COULD CARE LESS ABOUT ANYONE ELSE.working to overturn the unfair, pinko-Commie, nanny-state, do-gooder liquor bans? After all, those bans discriminate against business owners unable to get a liquor license. And think of the poor alcoholics, er, I mean, drinkers, forced to leave a restaurant just because drinking isn't allowed there. NEWS FLASH MORON, A DRINKER IS NOT GIONG TO GO INTO A PLACE AND EXPECT A DRINK IF THEY DONT SERVE IT. I think they may have common cause with the nicotine addicts, er, I mean, smokers.

Roger Baldwin ACLU founder Quote:

"I am for socialism, disarmament, and, ultimately, for abolishing the state itself... I seek the social ownership of property , the abolition of the propertied class and the sole control of those who produce wealth.
Communism is the goal!"

Who was it that said "Socialism is the next step to Communism???"

Tsk, tsk, Greg, I wouldn't brag about being a "card carrying member " of any union that espouses a totalitarian government!

I just call em "The American Communist Lawyers Union!" or the one name they are being labeled with recently "The American Criminal Liberties Union!"

Great post Allen Campbell! Inch by inch the plan is to turn "freedom" into a dirty word!!

Thanks A, I knew someone would get the point. This inch by inch erosion of our freedom that has resurged now has an old and dastardly history. It is like a plague that recurs when people become blind to what is happening to others, then strikes out to encompass all. The cost of freedom is eternal vigilance and, for those who are blinded by there own selfish agendas. when one mans freedom is violated, all men's freedoms are violated. Ignoring tyranny is to invite it in to your life, and it is the nature of the beast to make it's self known when you are so sure of your invulnerability. It is inevitable if not stopped before it is entrenched in our society.

Perhaps one day the American people will wake up and realize that they are being led as sheep to the slaughter. I'm just not sure that it will be soon enough, however. 2010 is just around the corner.

You see, we no longer have the will to resist servitude. Our pulpits are too busy preaching a prosperity gospel; newsmen are in bed with the forces they once disdained; statesmen have been replaced with opportunistic, self-serving politicians; and merchants know no god but money. Hence, it is left to a small--and I mean very small--remnant to sound the clarion call for freedom and independence. Unfortunately, few seem to be listening to their cries.

2010 seems to be a banner year for these designers of despotism. That is the target year for the implementation of the North American Community, which will unite the United States with Canada and Mexico. The global elite suffered a minor set-back when the U.S. Senate failed to pass the Bush/McCain/Kennedy/Graham amnesty-for-illegal-aliens bill. But if you think that George W. Bush is going to let that bill lie on the floor of defeat, you don't understand these people. President Bush will do everything he can to implement some kind of amnesty law before he leaves office. I would not be surprised if he attempted some sort of Executive Order or Presidential Directive in order to accomplish it. You see, it is absolutely essential to the designers of despotism that our southern border be eliminated. Absolutely essential.

Yes, I am saying it: George W. Bush is part of the global elite that seeks America's entrance into an international New World Order. In fact, all of the "top tier" presidential candidates from both major parties will offer zero resistance to this obstinate oligarchy. That is why it will not matter to a hoot in Hades if it is Hillary, Obama, Edwards, Giuliani, Romney, Gingrich, or Thompson who is elected. (Forget McCain; his presidential goose is cooked.)

Lady Liberty is walking very gingerly these days, and the path she treads is laden with traps and quicksand. The globalists have their hand-picked puppets positioned to take the reins from Dubya, and the pieces of the puzzle are almost all in place. 2010 just might be the year that Lady Liberty lowers her torch, folds her arms, and falls fast asleep.

I see a nightmare here of putting devices on every car. Who thought this stuff up? What were they they drinking?

GPS systems don`t grow in the wild like mushrooms. Were the producers of such devices behind this.?

EXCELLENT post anonymous 2:15 pm!!

The news came yesterday that unregulated and dangerous Mexican truckers will begin driving from Mexico across the United States and enter into Canada some time next week.

This is the beginning of the "North American Community" effort. The American people will not take notice and wholesale slaughter on U.S. highways will be the result of allowing unregulated Mexican drivers the use of our roadways.

There will be minimal protests and most Americans will not even take notice. The American people will eventually be forced to accept the Mexican truckers, just as they are being forced to accept the deluge of illegals into this country. ( Part of the NAU plan to erase borders and all feelings of national pride.)

The intrusion by government into our lives will now become greater with more banning of long held personal freedoms.

Another inch forward for globalists in their unrelenting quest for complete control of the U.S. Canada and Mexico.

It took almost 50 years for the globalists to control Europe. With the European Union now in place and complete control established, the dirty deed has been done.

Unlike Europe, it has taken only 15 years to begin control of the U.S. Canada and Mexico. The "North American Union" will accomplish this...... 2010 sounds about right!

Tyranny is the Globalist agenda and the U.S. citizens future!!

You are correct Anonymous 2:15 pm American politicians are truly the globalists puppets. It matters not which party is in power! It is a sad,sad, time for the people of what used to be a GREAT nation!!!

We, as Americans have not been vigilant and are losing the most precious gift to us from our forefathers ......Freedom!!

2:15 and A,
Excellent!!!!!!!!!!!

POST A COMMENT

• 'Kid Nation' reality show a new low
• Rivers a shameful hire
• Too little news
• ‘Diesel’ fumes
• Unlocalized story a disservice to readers
• Riled up by Christian music
• Darling of the left
• Solutions too costly