Should back up statements with evidence

I enjoy a respected friend who sometimes seems just another hysterical doom-crier making politically expedient, overwrought statements like:

“…freedom in the U.S. has already been so severely compromised that most of us would notice little change in our lives if Martial Law were imposed tomorrow and presidential elections discontinued.”

Yet, he too can’t enumerate any evidence for his statement. He cites an anecdotal SWAT team arrest evidently wholly perceived through third-hand hearsay, but SWAT teams are a necessary part of law enforcement, they were around long before the Bushies and they don’t ‘smash down doors’ until they have warrants issued by judges who have examined case-by-case probable cause. They do rarely err, though my friend offers no objective evidence (investigations?) of the summary execution of an innocent, handcuffed mother pleading on bended knee for her children that he alleges. In fact, he admits that no one probably ever heard of the case; could there be a reason for that? “No-knock” entries, again, require warrants and are necessary when a judge is convinced that announced entry will unduly endanger innocent people and/or allow for the destruction of evidence.

My friend reacts to my previous letter by asking: “is ‘what could I do pre-Bush that I can’t do now’ a relevant question?”

It is indeed. That he and so many others railing over allegedly Bush-assassinated American freedoms, still can’t answer it, proves that conclusively.

William Slusher