I've been reading almost this identical argument a lot lately. So it's hardly enterprising or informative, and certainly not original. Rather it seems to be the conservative talking points of the week, adequately written. It would have been more persuasive if he had, for example, cited the union argument for card checks, given documented examples of why it will work as he says--the nurses union flap of last year comes to mind immediately--and then made his argument.

Barone cites some decent examples about liberal attempts to squelch speech, which give this piece some value. However, It's a stretch to connect the dots as an orchestrated strategy by Obama or liberal leadership.

Standard single point of view opinion. This has a bit of evidence here and there, but there are several claims that really could use some support. I have attached links to the TV news report behind the "libel prosecutions" claim.

No links. No references. This story equates encouraging discussion with shutting down discussion. It equates trying to stop people from spreading lies with shutting down free speech.