SOPA - House Bill HR3261.  The purpose of this bill is to protect the owners of copyrighted material from unlicensed sale and distribution.  The bill was first introduced by Lamar Smith, a Republican Congressman from Texas.

PIPA – A closely related bill officially known as the “Preventing Real Online Threats to Economic Creativity and Theft of Intellectual Property Act” The bill originated in the Senate by Democrat Senator from Vermont Patrick Leahy.  S. 968 is similar in its stated goals to SOPA.

What Powers Does SOPA Give the Federal Government? According to the Library of Congress:

Authorizes the Attorney General (AG) to seek a court order against a U.S.-directed foreign Internet site committing or facilitating online piracy to require the owner, operator, or domain name registrant, or the site or domain name itself if such persons are unable to be found, to cease and desist further activities constituting specified intellectual property offenses under the federal criminal code including criminal copyright infringement, unauthorized fixation and trafficking of sound recordings or videos of live musical performances, the recording of exhibited motion pictures, or trafficking in counterfeit labels, goods, or services.

Think about what this means.  If this blog used a picture and it was (unknowingly) copyrighted, this site could be shutdown.  If you post a video on YouTube of your kids birthday party and there is music in the background, you are violating this law.  If you post a news clip on Facebook about an event near your home, you are in violation.  The response from the people that provide these services i.e., Google, Facebook, bloggers, etc., will be to either censor everything, or prevent you from doing anything.

How Does SOPA Affect Internet Service Providers?

Please re-read the powers the AG has.  The bill goes further:

Requires online service providers, Internet search engines, payment network providers, and Internet advertising services, upon receiving a copy of a court order relating to an AG action, to carry out certain preventative measures including withholding services from an infringing site or preventing users located in the United States from accessing the infringing site. Requires payment network providers and Internet advertising services, upon receiving a copy of such an order relating to a right holder’s action, to carry out similar preventative measures.

That’s right.  This is the black boot of government stepping on the neck of American businesses.  If the service providers don’t comply, they too can be shut down and blacklisted.  If they comply with the federal givernment, they get immunity, if not, they get the book thrown at them.  Note immunity is only given if the service providers comply:

Provides immunity from liability for service providers, payment network providers, Internet advertising services, advertisers, Internet search engines, domain name registries, or domain name registrars that take actions required by this Act or otherwise voluntarily block access to or end financial affiliation with such sites.

What Does Google Think of the Bill? Here’s a collection of quotes from Eric Schmidt:

“If there is a law that requires DNSs [domain name systems, the protocol that allows users to connect to websites] to do X and it’s passed by both houses of congress and signed by the president of the United States and we disagree with it then we would still fight it,” he added. “If it’s a request the answer is we wouldn’t do it, if it’s a discussion we wouldn’t do it.”

That’s good.  Google has some serious weight in Washington.  He goes on:

“I would be very, very careful if I were a government about arbitrarily [implementing] simple solutions to complex problems,” he said. “So, ‘let’s whack off the DNS’. Okay, that seems like an appealing solution but it sets a very bad precedent because now another country will say ‘I don’t like free speech so I’ll whack off all those DNSs’ – that country would be China.”It doesn’t seem right. I would be very, very careful about that stuff. If [the UK government] do [sic] it the wrong way it could have disastrous precedent setting in other areas.”

What is DNS? For those who don’t know, DNS (Domain Name System) is the system used to route email and web surfing requests.  It exists so that if you type www.toberight.com into a browser, you see this site.  Without DNS, you’d have to type in an IP Address, a set of numbers that identifies each web entity.

Yeah, we want the federal government monkeying around with DNS.

Who in Washington is Supporting This Bill? Chris Dodd – the guy who caused the housing crisis – is still behind this bill.  As are many other lame brain megalomaniacs in Congress.

Finally, it looks like we’re getting some traction on this.  Supporters, even original sponsors, of the bill are dropping like flies.  Senator Marco Rubio, a favorite of ToBeRIGHT, has withdrawn his support for the bill.  From Fox News:

“I have decided to withdraw my support for the Protect IP Act. Furthermore, I encourage Senator Reid to abandon his plan to rush the bill to the floor,” Rubio posted on his Facebook page, ”Instead, we should take more time to address the concerns raised by all sides, and come up with new legislation that addresses Internet piracy while protecting free and open access to the Internet.”

It looks like Daryl Issa is taking a good strong stand too:

“I think the Republican House leadership will look and say, ‘Unless we have the support of the vast majority of Republicans, we’re not going to take the bill to the floor.’”

For more information, there is an excellent write up and FAQ at CNet, see their information.

All because we’re free.

Like the proverbial child looking up at his Dad, saying, “One day I want to be President.”

Or maybe, “I’m going to be an astronaut.”

For most of my life, these visions of what could be was the essence of my impression of the USA.

I can feel that slipping away.

From Human Events:

According to the 18th annual Index of Economic Freedom, released Thursday morning by the Heritage Foundation and the Wall Street Journal, Hong Kong enjoys Earth’s freest economy. It invariably has topped this list since 1995. No. 2 Singapore leads Australia, New Zealand, Switzerland, Canada, Chile, Mauritius, and Ireland. Agnostic on political freedom, the Index evaluates fiscal discipline, taxes, regulations, monetary policy, rule of law, corruption, and other measures of economic liberty.

America has slid from No. 9 in 2011 to tenth place today. Indeed, this is the fourth consecutive year in which the U.S. fell a notch. Out of a perfect score of 100, America declined 1.5 points to 76.3. Denmark, No. 11, scored 76.2.

“As recently as 2008, the United States was ranked 7th, rated 81, and considered a ‘free’ economy,” Heritage notes. “Today, it is ‘mostly free’ –the runner-up category.” The Index’s authors add: “Fading confidence in the government’s determination to promote or even sustain open markets has discouraged entrepreneurship and dynamic investment within the private sector.”

U.S. tax-and-spend scores are appalling: Among 179 countries surveyed, America is No. 127 in government spending and No. 133 in fiscal freedom. The U.S. suffers an “overall tax burden amounting to 24 percent of total domestic income,” the Index states. “Government expenditures have grown to 42.2 percent of GDP, and the budget deficit is close to 10 percent of GDP. Total public debt is now larger than the size of the economy.”

Meanwhile, U.S. businesspeople moan beneath the regulatory rubble. “Over 70 new major regulations have been imposed since early 2009, with annual costs of more than $38 billion.”

Well, that’s just great.

Our politicians – even the so-called conservatives – are asleep at the wheel.  The left is actively subverting freedom.  Who is left?

You and me.

The politicians aren’t going to fix a damn thing.  It’s up to us to force the hand, or one day…well, I’ll let Ronald Reagan say it:

“Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children’s children what it was once like in the United States where men were free.”

It wasn’t long ago that leftist interests across the land were trying to identify the Tea Party leader, in order to Alinskify said leader.

The left failed.

Try as they might, leftist minions were unable to identify, isolate, vilify, and ostracize any one leader of the Tea Party.

That’s because the Tea Party is not an organized group.  The Tea Party is the modern incarnation of the conservative movement itself, and it is not new.  It is not new at all.

So why ask such a pointed question?  Why would anyone suggest the conservative movement shut the hell up?

Because there are groups that have taken on the Tea Party moniker, but that are not an incarnation of the modern conservative movement.  They are groups that seem only interested in influence.  Party influence, that is.  The kind of influence that the real Tea Party loathes.

This evening two emails hit my inbox almost simultaneously.  The first was from Tea Party Nation, the second from the Tea Party Patriots.  I am a member of both.

Judson Phillips over at Tea Party Nation declared Victory! While Matt Kibbe at Tea Party Patriots said that hell or high water, we must stop the Boehner Plan from passing.  The tone of the emails could not have been more different.

Two self proclaimed “Tea Party” representatives 180 degrees out of phase with one another.

Well, sort of.

Phillips is against any debt ceiling increase, but seems to understand that this is a long fight and it is okay to declare a victory, though the legislation is far from perfect.  He said:

“We can take a moment to congratulate ourselves, but only a moment.  Boehner still wants to raise the debt ceiling by $2.5 trillion.  At least with his plan there are no new taxes, but that does not make it a great plan.”

Kibbe doesnt even offer an “at least” qualifier. He is clear that he thinks the Boehner plan stinks.  Anything other than Cut, Cap and Balance is a non-starter.  The problem, of course, is that CCB is DOA in the Senate, and double dead on Obama’s desk.  The House has already voted on it and passed it.  Beyond that symbolism, what else is there?

Nothing.  Cut Cap and Balance is a nice idea, but in the real world, it’s just a conversation piece.  Not to mention it’s big time constitutional issues.

The Boehner Plan, best I can tell, seeks to cut spending by a total of around $3 Trillion over the next 10 years and increase the debt ceiling by around $1 Trillion.

That’s it.  Nothin’ fancy.  No tax increases.  Just a spending cut for a debt limit increase.

This is a deal we should go after.  It’s a good deal.  Here are the pros and cons…

Pros:

1. No tax increases of any kind, even those the elite call “loopholes.”
2. More spending cuts than debt limit increase
3. At Obama’s spending rate, we’ll be out of borrowing capacity sometime next Spring, so the conversation about his rampant spending will be front and center during the heat of the campaign.
4. Everybody will be forced to calm the hell down and stop talking about economic armageddon, even if everyone knows that talk was nothing but a ruse anyway.

Cons:

1. The spending cuts are stupid.  $3 Trillion over 10 years is a joke of the highest order.  Obama raised the debt more than that in the past two years.
2. The debt limit should be lowered, not raised.  The spending levels Obama has taken us to are of epic proportions.  We should be looking at a baseline pre-TARP. (I wish this was an original thought…thanks, Rush.)

All in all?  I like it.  It calms down the story and puts tremendous political pressure on Obama at an opportune time.

As part of the REAL Tea Party – the conservative movement – I’m here to tell you…this is just the type of position we should be in.

As for the institutionalized Tea Party types?  Well, shut the hell up.

It is not reasonable to take the position:  No.  Hell no.  Never.  No how.  No way. Never.  Ever. Not a chance.

That doesn’t work in reality.

Take a quick look back at Reagan.  Over at Conservative Hideout, there is talk about what it means to be conservative.  I found myself (again) defending Reagan as a shining example of what a conservative leader should be.  One of the commenters had said that Reagan as a true conservative was nothing but mere revisionism.  In response, I wrote:

I don’t think so. Reagan was absolutely sold on conservatism. If you read Reagan’s writing (check out “In His Own Hand”) and also letters between Reagan and William Buckley (see, “The Reagan I Knew”) you’ll find that Reagan was a deeply committed conservative.

But he was also a pragmatist, and it could be argued that he was naive on occasion.

Reagan had a Democrat controlled Congress. To pass ANYthing, he had to overcome massive obstacles. To his credit, he was able to reverse much of the damage that progressives before him had done.

Reagan was suckered once or twice by promises of controlled spending. At the end of the day, he signed budgets that were the best he could get, without dismantling the military. His private writings and letters reflect his angst over having to cut deals in this regard. Several of his public speeches also reflect this. In September of 1987 Reagan was faced with a spend-crazy Congress and a debt ceiling increase. Reagan said:

“This decision is not easy. I have no choice but to sign this bill to guarantee the United States Government’s credit. But I also will not permit Congress to dismantle our national defense, to jeopardize arms reduction, or to increase your taxes. I am determined that will not happen.”

After many such instances, the debt did increase under Reagan, but not because of lack of money, but because of massive spending. As we all know, Reaganomics produced massive new revenues flowing into the Treasury.

Reagan wrote passionately – even after several years in office – about dismantling the Department of Education, and other bureaucracies. His writing reflects real distress in the realization that he would not be able to do such things given the Congress he had to work with.

I think your characterization of Reagan “revisionism” is misguided. When you look deeply at the historical documents and speeches, the real picture shines through, and it is one of passionately held conservative beliefs and a nonstop effort to fight against progressivism.

The point is that we must move the ball down the field. It took over a century for the progressives to turn our Republic into the behemoth that it is. We’ll not reverse all the damage in one vote, in one house of Congress, with a hostile Senate and even more hostile Executive. It will take years of pounding away at the statist insurrection.

It is in the spirit of Reagan that it is time to declare this battle won, and move forward.

When a grass roots organization becomes institutionalized, it loses its spirit. It becomes poisoned. There is Tea that we should not be drinking. Check your supplier carefully.

The Conservative Hideout always has something good to say.

Political Realities is always thoughtful.  Some good stuff coming out of these pages.

A personal favorite, sharp as a tack and always a good read – visit Blog de KingShamus

There is a huge depth of content at Emerging Corruption.

Keep an eye on America’s Election HQ at Fox News.

Rasmussen will have breaking polls all day, I’m sure.  These are the most reliable.

Tabitha Hale is best in class.  She represents the new class of punditry – smart, down-to-earth and always right.

Of course, don’t forget about The Blaze, Red State and Hot Air.

Beyond that – just check out the blog roll.  Sit back, plug in and enjoy…

This brings us to today.  There is a palpable feeling of change in the air.  But is it a fourth cataclysm?

First, I’ve been trying to put my finger on the specific nature of the change.  I’ve come to the conclusion that the word “change” is just me being lazy.  Nothing has really changed, as much as been accelerated.  Barack Obama is a pretty standard Marxist – that much is clear.  Put that together with a Congressional majority who shares his power-hungry ideals to one degree or another, and you get today’s “change.”  All they have done though is the same thing that has been done for the last 80 years, just more of it a lot faster.

The result?  The fourth cataclysm.

The late 00′s will surely be in the history books.  That is, if the People are able to stop the madmen who have taken power.  What will the history books say?  What will this era be called?  That probably depends on what happens over the next five years – the era will get it’s name based on which side takes firm root: the Obama socialists, or freedom-loving citizens.

It is possible that Republicans could take back both houses of Congress in 2010 and then the White House in 2012 and be able to roll back some of the aggressive government expansion put in place by the Obama socialists.  Then, with new controls over government power in place, we could move into a new era of general stability and happiness.  I hope this happens.

I am worried, though.  I’m worried that Obama and his minions will be able to put so much of their evil plan into place, that we will be unable to free ourselves from the iron grip of tyranny.  If this happens, all possible outcomes are bad.  I can hardly imagine what it looks like, but I am afraid for my kids.  Through history we have seen the horror that government tyranny can cause – look at the millions killed – KILLED – by Hitler, Stalin and Mao.  Call it national socialism, communism, whatever you want.  Regardless of name, these governments had much in common, namely that these governments became the arbiter of all rights.  The same path that we are on now.

The first step in preventing tryanny from taking hold is to remove the leftists from their positions of power in the Congress. With a little luck, a continued vigorous backlash and a little divine providence, we can preserve the wonder that is the United States of America.

But…  You gotta love the spirit and his passion.  This is something to see…

Crazy, eh? Still…not quite sure how to feel about this. Who’da thunk I wouldn’t have an opinion…

How am I so sure that American exceptionalism is real?

Examples abound.   The most obvious is to simply observe immigration tendencies.  People from all over the world are risking life and limb to come to the United States.  It is thought that there are some 20 million illegal immigrants in the USA, with hundreds of thousands more coming in each year.  Why?  Why would these millions of people leave their homes and in many cases, their families, in order to come to the USA?  There are myriad reasons including opportunity to make money, to live free from religious persecution, to be safe from tyrannical rulers, and on and on.  But why do they choose the USA?  Why not some other country?  These questions are rhetorical, though certainly an enterprising individual could attempt a list, though to prepare an exhaustive one would be almost impossible: As long as there is human creativity there are new reasons to immigrate to the USA – this is, in itself a testament to our exceptionalism.

Second, look at our poor.  Two quick observations will provide a wealth of information about American exceptionalism.  First, America’s poor live pretty well.  Among those who meet the US government’s criteria for being considered poor – some 45% own their own home; 63% have cable or satellite TV!  Be that as it may, it is not what is so telling in terms of American exceptionalism.  What is?

The fact that the poor don’t stay poor.

One of the reasons for American exceptionalism is that we are distinctly not a caste system – wealth is not a zero sum game.  In America, people are constantly shifting from one “class” to another.  Absent a handy study, I’ll take myself as an example.

In 1996, fresh out of college, I made $29,000.00 per year, plus about another $15,000 in commissions from my sales job.  5 years later, I still had a sales job – only this one had a base salary of $65,000.00 and commissions were about double that.  Fast forward another 8 years and I am the President and CEO of my own company.  Where, but for the United States of America, is such a story possible?  The UK?  Australia?  Maybe.  But the restrictions placed on how and when businesses can operate, along with confiscatory tax policies, make this type of upward mobility far more challenging overseas than here in the US.

Now, since I am a (now) a rich white man, maybe I am not the best example of upward mobility.  But even in public life, there are scores of figures we can look to as evidence.  Heck, 50 years ago a black man couldn’t sit at the lunch counter with me – now we have a black man for the President of the United States!  How’s THAT for upward mobility?

Unfortunately, for most liberals, wealth is a zero sum game.  That is, there is only a predefined pie and you either have a piece of it or you do not.  This is the argument for income confiscation and redistribution.  This flawed thinking is also frequently combined with liberal ideas like “relative mobility” and “relative poverty.” By painting a picture of hopeless class struggle, the liberal wins power.  When the liberal wins power, Americans lose freedom.

Third, Americans dominate of most every field.  Although this is undeniable, it is also easy to attack.  Liberals will insist that there are plenty of areas where the USA is inferior to an international rival.  But let’s be real here – the USA dominates.  In the past 100 years, we have led the way with inventions, discoveries and developments in things like the airplane, the automobile, distributed electricity, production lines, industrial chemicals and applications, the internet and on and on.  Yes, I understand that probably every country has some claim to fame.  But the sheer quantity of developments, discoveries and inventions in the US dwarfs any other nation by a country mile.

But it is not these developments, inventions and discoveries themselves that speak to American exceptionalism.  Rather, it is the fact that these things were made possible by our societal systems.  In countries where there are oppressive governments, these types of creative discoveries and inventions are an impossibility.  The very structure of the USA created an environment where we could drive so much global development.  It is our very structure that makes us exceptional.

This last point gets to the very heart of the matter: there are hundreds or thousands of examples of how we are exceptional.  But it is the “why” that is so pertinent.

We are exceptional because we are free to pursue any item of our attraction.  Be it material, logical or even emotional, our country is set up to provide each person the maximum latitude to seek happiness as each sees fit.  Our social contract provides that we do not disturb our brother while doing so.  It is the perfect combination of freedom to act, with social pressure and legal structure to keep order.  No other country on Earth has such a perfect system.

The perfection that exists in the USA is fragile, however.  In fact, we have become less and less perfect over time, as bureaucrats and politicians confiscate our freedom and earned wealth in one power grab after another.

Although our freedom is eroding slowly over time, we are still exceptional.  We are exceptional as evidenced by our success in the world and by the democratic nature of immigration votes.  We are exceptional because we are free.

As leftist policy consumes more and more freedom exceptionalism becomes more and more difficult to illustrate.   There is a point at which our freedom will become so eroded that we will no longer be exceptional.  That time is fast approaching.  When the government seeks to control most every aspect of our lives, it will serve only to stifle the creativity that makes us great.  The US is exceptional and will remain so until the power hungry left gobbles up the precious freedom that feeds us.

We need to start focusing on our guy (or gal) for 2012.  But who?  I have a part of me that thinks we need a previousely unknown candidate.  A dark horse who can rally the troops.  But the more pragmatic side of me urges caution in that regard.  So who is it going to be??

Dear Sir:

I am writing to ask for your help regarding the current national situation with energy.  With all respect, I implore you to keep driving the point that we need a responsible energy bill sent to the President and we need it fast.

The scene on the Hill last Friday was a grand spectacle and it was very well received.  At a family gathering this past weekend, there was widespread agreement that Republicans must continue to hammer this home…

It may well be the key to our success this Fall.

After discussions with the nine (9) voting age members of my family in Virginia, and many of my friends, I have found commonality in opinion:

1) Republicans should find every high rock they can, stand atop and scream, “We need to drill in ANWR, the shale deposits, and off shore!”  This has such wide support – it would be great if you would join the call for this – in a way in which people can actually hear you!

2) Let’s build as many nuclear power plants as possible.  Nobody I talk to is afraid of them at all.  There are plenty of places in our great commonwealth to build one – how about we lead the charge?  You’ll have widespread support, I’m sure.

3) Stay out of our personal lives and let us run our own businesses.  Virtually everyone I talked with this weekend mocked Obama for his stupid “inflate the tires” comment.  The underlying theme is that we don’t want our elected leaders condescending to us and telling us how we should live, vis a vis inflating tires and buying a certain type of light bulb.

In short, we want the government to get out of our way!  Let us drill where the oil is. Get out of the way of nuclear development.  Get rid of the taxes that further drive up energy costs.  Set the American people free to pursue low cost energy and they will do it.  It starts with removing the shackles of oppressive government regulation and legislation.  You are in a position to do just that.  Please help.

Second, most of the speech consisted of the same, tired, leftist ideals that Marxists use to justify the confiscation and redistribution of wealth…  “We’re going to save the world and our children, we just need to make the proper investments” is typically something they say.  Barack cloaks the sentiment in lofty terms, perhaps even better then the leftists of a generation ago:

“This is the moment when we must build on the wealth that open markets have created, and share its benefits more equitably.”

What exactly does that mean?  It means those of us inclined to produce something of quality, generate wealth, and use freedom for self-improvement, will have our efforts rewarded by Barack Obama so thoughtfully stealing our wealth in the name of “[sharing] the benefits more equitably.” 

Change?  Hardly.  Liberals have been talking up redistribution of wealth since the nineteeth century.

Third and most importantly, Obama says he’s going to save the world.  One of the methods that seems to have taken hold with the left is to make such an audacious claim, that it is too exhausting to combat rhetorically.  Or, in the case of the right, we are generally too busy building wealth, learning, working and otherwise being productive to care.  Well, it’s time to care.  Here’s a short list of the things Barack “the messiah” Obama is going to do:

“…defeat terror and dry up the well of extremism that supports it.”

Oh that’s rich.  Has he not been doing everything in his power for the last 3 years to leave Iraq totally hanging out to dry? 

“…renew our resolve to rout the terrorists who threaten our security in Afghanistan”

Um, Obama just said that even knowing what he knows now, he would not go back and support the surge.  We should have achieved peace in Iraq by moving the political process forward, he claims.  Yet with Afghanistan, he wants to use the military.  Why will the military work in one place, but not another? 

“…renew the goal of a world without nuclear weapons”

I bet Russia, Iran, North Korea and China love this idea.  In fact, I bet they go right along with it, on paper anyway.

“…build on the wealth that open markets have created, and share its benefits more equitably”

“Share…more equitably.”  Why do I have to share anything?  Where does it say in the Constitution that I have to share – and share with the rest of the world?! 

“…we will not leave our children a world where the oceans rise and famine spreads and terrible storms devastate our lands”

Obama is going to prevent the seas from rising.  He’s going to stop famine.  He’s going to stop storms.  This guy is really something!  Didn’t Superman, as played by Christopher Reeve, spin the Earth backwards on it’s axis, in order to reverse time and prevent Lois Lane from being killed by an earthquake?  That’s it!  Obama is Superman!

“…stand for the human rights of the dissident in Burma, the blogger in Iran, or the voter in Zimbabwe”

Human rights!?  Where was Obama screaming about human rights when Uday and Qusay Hussein were raping pre-teen girls in staged rape-rooms in Iraqi presidential palaces?  Where was he when women in Iraq were prevented from working?  Where was he when Saddam was jailing or killing any and all who would stand up to him?  Human rights?  He’s kidding, right?

Then, the be-all-end-all of sickening, leftist tripe.  Obama chasitises his own country while speaking abroad:

“I know my country has not perfected itself. At times, we’ve struggled to keep the promise of liberty and equality for all of our people. We’ve made our share of mistakes, and there are times when our actions around the world have not lived up to our best intentions.”

How dare he!  The United States has single handedly done more for freedom in this world than the rest of the countries of the world combined.  We take in more immigrants, legal and illegal, than the rest of the countries of the world COMBINED.  We give more in charity as a country – more that twice as much than the next largest giving country.  We have been the sole source of strength of freedom in the world for the past 250 years! 

Obama should have stood there and exclamed that the world would do well to follow the United States.  To embrace our freedom based on natural law.  God given rights to pursue life as we see fit.  To use our own passions, wisdom, strength, convictions and ideas to build wealth.  To strive for personal achievement.  To be free to enter into contracts and the freedom to make something from nothing.  The freedom to be everything that the human spirit can fathom and do so under the blanket of natural freedom granted by God to every person on earth.  That is the message Barack should have given. 

This man has dishonored himself.  He is not deserving of any attention whatsoever.  He stands against all that is free and promotes the evil of incremental tyranny.  His speech in Germany is proof positive of that.