You can add this item to that ever-growing “it can’t happen here” list; the suspension of our First Amendment rights under the pretense of security.

From FOX News

A bill making its way through Congress proposes to give the U.S. government authority over all networks considered part of the nation’s critical infrastructure. Under the proposed Cybersecurity Act of 2009, the president would have the authority to shut down Internet traffic to protect national security.

The government also would have access to digital data from a vast array of industries including banking, telecommunications and energy. A second bill, meanwhile, would create a national cybersecurity adviser — commonly referred to as the cybersecurity czar — within the White House to coordinate strategy with a wide range of federal agencies involved.

Ben Franklin pointed out that people willing to exchange essential liberty for a bit of temporary safety, deserved neither; this proposed bill makes me both feel less safe, and less free.

The Cybersecurity Act of 2009 (S.773) is sponsored by sen. John D. Rockefeller (D), and co-sponsored by Senators Nelson, Bayh, and Snowe, and it seeks to create yet another Czar: the Cybersecurity Czar. This is either the sixth or seventh Czar created (or suggested) by the Obama administration so far (Health Czar, Climate Czar, Urban Affairs Czar, Car Czar, Technology Czar, Copyright Czar).Added to the already existing line-up of Czars, this is the most loyalty in our government since Cornwallis’ surrender at Yorktown.

This is clearly yet another blatantly unconstitutional power grab by the Obama administration; an attempt at seizing control of what is quickly becoming both the primary venue for the press, and a national town square where we congregate to exercise our God-given rights.

S.773 is fifty-five pages, way too long for a DC bunch more adept at reading the luncheon specials at Charlie Palmer or The Monocle, than the garbage laws they vote on. You know no one will actually read it.

George W. Bush was repeatedly called a Fascist, a scare monger, and accused of violating our civil liberties in the name of national security. John McCain was described as “more of the same” during the Presidential campaign, and Barack Obama was elected on the idea of “change we need.”

So, where IS that promised change?

Is that “change” the difference between Obama’s pre-election rhetoric, and the post-election reality of his governance?

If that’s it, then keep your change, and I’ll keep my freedom.

Or maybe we’ll meet at Yorktown to discuss the whole thing.