A story I missed from last month ties in with what I said earlier about using the "Bush did it too!" argument to justify Orwellian tactics.

According to this article, the Department of Homeland Security has placed a political enemy of Janet Napolitano on the DHS "No-Fly" list:

On July 16th, Arizona State Treasurer Dean Martin discovered he was on Department of Homeland Security's "No-Fly" list when he was "pulled aside by agents from the Transportation Security Administration," according to azfamily.com.

Martin was an outspoken critic of former Arizona Governor and current Secretary of Homeland Security (DHS). There's no doubt Napolitano has some hard feelings for Martin. He was one of the first open critics of her state-wide photo radar cameras (calling them unconstitutional), initiated by a single signature of Napolitano's dictatorial executive order. Back in January during a State Loan Commission meeting, he also gained some media attention when, as Chairman of the Arizona State Loan Commission, he attempted to warn Arizonans that the state would be facing a major budget crisis by March (which has come and gone) due to Napolitano's reckless spending as governor. This meeting took place right before she flew off to Washington to pursue her life-long career as a socialist politician. Before she hopped on a plane and left our great state, Martin criticized her in front of TV cameras at the meeting, calling journalistic attention to how devastating her policies have been to the people of Arizona. In typical Democrat fashion, she had a fit. And stormed out of the meeting.

Now Martin's on the "No-Fly" potential terrorist list. Democrats should be distancing themselves from Napolitano's actions by screaming bloody outrage at such disgusting abuse of governmental power. (Imagine if John Ashcroft were still head of DHS and a local Democrat Treasurer were put on a potential terrorist "No-Fly" list.

Mr. Martin joins a growing list which began with a few hundred people, and now runs to over a million names according to the ACLU. If the NRA is correct, the ACLU is understating the case. According to the latest issue of the NRA's America's First Freedom, the list is now at 1.5 million names, and growing. (Additional background here and here.)

Moreover, the No-Fly list is not intended to be limited to flying. If Frank Lautenberg and Rahm Emanuel have their way, these more than a million Americans (who don't have to be convicted of anything to get on the list) will lose their Second Amendment rights.

First, here's some vintage Rahm Emanuel, talking to the Brady Center in 2007:

Here's what Emanuel said he wanted:

"if you're on that no fly list, your access to the right to bear arms is canceled, because you're not part of the American Family - you don't deserve that right."

In June, one of the country's most notorious gun grabbers, New Jersey Senator Frank Lautenberg, introduced a bill (S. 1317, pdf here) which would make Rahm Emanuel's dream come true.

When I posted about this previously, Lautenberg had not yet introduced the bill, although I noted that the DHS under Janet Napolitano had already been suggesting that right wing groups (such as anti-abortion protesters, certain veterans, and people overly concerned with the loss of their Second Amendment rights) should be watched.

This morning I learned that the "suggestions" are coming from left wing activist groups like the Southern Poverty Law Center.

And on top of that, they would also seem to include political opponents of Janet Napolitano.

All of these and more are now earmarked to lose a fundamental constitutional rights if the Lautenberg bill passes.

I hate to be repetitive, but since Lautenberg won't quit, neither will I. Once again:

...this is a grotesque constitutional abuse. With the one hand, they want to expand the no fly list to include right wing political dissidents -- including, in a Kafkaesque twist, Americans who buy guns in fear that their rights will be taken away. And now with the other hand, they want to expand its use to deprive citizens (who haven't even been accused, much less charged with or convicted of crimes) of their Second Amendment rights. (If you're so paranoid that you think we're going to take your guns away, then we should take your guns away!)

I won't mince words here. For even threatening to introduce such a bill, I think Frank Lautenberg has violated his oath of office and disgraced the Senate.

I realize that at 85 he's still a young chap, but he's the best argument for term limits to come along since Robert Byrd.

It would be nice to think they know not what they do.

But since when has a little thing like that stopped them?

MORE: Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-N.Y.) is co-sponsoring the House version of S.1317 -- a "bill preventing people on the government's no-fly list from purchasing guns."

Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-N.Y.), a strong gun control advocate, is co-sponsoring the legislation that would apply to the nearly 1 million people that make up the government's no-fly list - people believed to either be terrorist or have strong terrorism connections.

Currently the no-fly list is not a part of the background check for buying guns.

A Zogby International Poll last month found that 69 percent of 3,967 registered American voters only supported a move to prohibit people on the no-fly list from buying a weapon if they have previously been convicted of a crime. On the other hand, 20 percent said anyone on the list should be prohibited.

MORE: For conservatives this is probably a minor point, but I'm just wondering.... Does Carolyn McCarthy realize that her bill would disarm her colleague Loretta Sanchez?

Or will they be exempting members of Congress?

CORRECTION: When I expressed the fear that "these more than a million Americans" would lose their Second Amendment rights I was probably in error, as the group includes people who are not Americans, and thus do not have Second Amendment rights. As to what the percentages are, I do not know, and the government isn't supplying numbers.