Liberal overstep diminishing returns update: Houston mayor gets the smack down.

In this post I noted that the Mayor of Houston (a flaming liberal and obviously gay) tried to get several pastors to pony up their sermons and emails which might contain negative references to her gay agenda.  Obviously she meant to attack them with their own words somehow either with liberal "gay hater" propaganda or potentially with civil penalties such as this type of thing.  She went so far as to try to use force of law in order to achieve her political goal.  My view was simple: it was a liberal overstep that would fail.  So today's update is that it did indeed fail; the mayor rescinded the demand under intense lash back by the people.

Not only did it fail, it failed loudly.  It's failure is sending a message across the lib-o-sphere: "don't overstep anymore, it's not working and will do more harm than good".  Again, I couldn't care less if Houston mayor Annise Parker is gay.  But I do care intensely that she is using her elected position as leader of ALL the people in Houston to drive her personal gay agenda and impose it upon all free people.  That is NOT what she was put in office to do and she either needs to stop or the people will stop her now that the pendulum is swinging right.

Each of these events sends a message and as the message grows louder and more frequent it emboldens more people.  Increasingly, the people begin to say "I will not comply".  That's step 1.  If government doesn't get the message, it rapidly turns into step two which is "I will not comply and furthermore I'm going to do what I want to. So what do you think you are going to do about it"?  In other words, common people begin to directly challenge the overlords not just with words but with actions.  If the government fails to back down from its authoritarian, "zero tolerance" hard line then that's when the trouble starts.  The crowd is itching for a fight now.  Step 3 is the riots and the spilling of blood.

Here is another interesting case of the same kind of thing: a nurse who had been in Sierra Leone was ordered by state authorities upon her return to Maine that she must "submit" to "direct active monitoring".  She told the powers that be that she would not comply and she shoved it in their faces by taking a bike ride.  The governor, flabbergasted at her insolence, vowed to use the "full extent" of his authority to make her submit. 

In yet another sign that the herd is moving to the right, the courts struck down the quarantine order and declared the woman free of the judgement of the "zero tolerance" crowd.  Again, the decision was quick and decisive, again sending the message to overstepping liberal government that they are not really in charge of the people.  I mean, look at the signals that got sent there.  The governor just proved how much authority he has to make kingly proclamations on free people: ZERO.  Politicians take street cred hits when they lose battles like this and so the message again goes out to other would-be liberal oversteppers: it's no longer worth the personal political damage it could cause.
 
What's most interesting about this is that the case involved "scary ebola" yet still the woman's rights prevailed.  NO WAY would that have happened 1 year ago.  They would have beaten the crap out of her and bound her to a bed and put her in a medical coma had that been required to make her "comply".  Why?  Because it's more about being in control for the liberals than anything else.