Still trying to sort out the implications of the Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission Supreme Court decision this week?
Puzzled by President Obama’s threat of a “forceful response”? Wondering what sort of legislative remedies against the First Amendment are being cooked up even now by Sen. “Schemer” Schumer?
Tempted to believe the moonbat ravings of New York Times readers or the unhinged, Howard-Beale-like broadcasts of MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann that the 5-4 opinion presages a wholesale corporate takeover of the electoral process?
To get a sense of what really was at stake — nothing less than freedom of speech – have a look at this video, produced by the libertarian Cato Institute. As Mark Tapscott noted yesterday in the Washington Examiner:
I’ve read more newspaper and magazine articles, court cases, and blog posts on various aspects of campaign finance reform than I care to remember, but none of them captured the essential points of what is at stake as well as this video produced by the Cato Institute:
And then shudder to think — if the lawyers who argued on behalf of the government in this case had their way — how close to the world of Fahrenheit 451 we are.
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
130 Comments
What is scary to me is how little people understand this law, (including me), and how the court voted 5-4 and Obama has three more years! Thanks for explaining it!
John Taylor for Fed Chairman!!!
"To get a sense of what really was at stake — nothing less than freedom of speech"
If we don't get the Federal Reserve in proper hands NOW then freedom of speech going forward may be moot.
Again. Breitbart & Co. And people who align their ideals and values with the Tea Party Movement. Get on this bandwagon and start banging the pavement and contact Congress.
John Taylor for Fed Chairman. That is your Hope & Change. Right there.
Hugo Chavez (Mao, Stalin, Castro) would certainly rail against this decision.
And so now, every time you see someone railing against this decision, you will know without a doubt who that person is aligned with. (As if it isn't already obvious)
And all the people that idolize Guevarra…
I say "NO LIMITS ON FREE SPEECH" for any body for any reason. A free society must be allowed to express itself, even corporations and churches and labor unions and yes…even Glenn Beck and Kieth Oberman. The congress shall make no law…….what part of that is hard to understand? If I don't like the political ads then I will change the channel. I'm no genius, but I like to think for myself when deciding who to vote for. I'm not going to be influenced to change my vote because big oil runs a TV spot, anymore than I was when Oprah said to vote for Obama.
Sorry ,but a clear footprint of exactly what many people in the administration has already been cast. They will try and undo this then we must insist what of "Roe v Wade"? It is endless with this retaking of America, if we allow it will happen…upon my rooftop I go …
This McCain ruling has giving foreigners and foreign government and our enemies the right to influence our government and thus republicans cheer our surrender to our enemies.
yes what video said is true and the battle against stupid government goes on, but giviing corp a voice in our election process is not the answer.
you diminish a real person voice/vote.
We will just have to out- 'corp' ..just as what happens with any other influence.."corps" are EVERYWHERE!!!
Both progressive government parties ignored the problems discussed and thus they wanted it thrown out.
The job of congress is to fix problems they created instead congress and both parties in a very real way wanted corp help and money in the process so they don’t have to listen to the little people. This voting for something to look good and let court throw it out a win win situation and the money just flows.
A shout out to President Bush, who I criticized early and often. His wise choices for SCOTUS are now bearing fruit for our Republic.
Do you really think that just because a foreign corporation can put an add on TV- Americans will buy into the add and throw up a white flag?
I believe there are far too many people like you and I that do our homework and research- we stay informed and spread the information to our friends and families. We debate and argue and solidify our beliefs. I do not believe that we will roll over and give in to a foreign corporate entity just because of a slick add.
It is far more dangerous for our own Government to put limits on who can express their political opinion publicly. That is simply too much power.
Agreed they are dangerously married….how about a divorce?
with the progressive tax laws it was government that created this corp mess.
Every individual America involved in a corp has already the right to vote, free speech, and their own money to influence the election process. A corp is property a creation of the government a tool of the government and thus has no voice in the election process.
No where in the constitution says business is a real person.
we have to get rid of the progressives…and both government parties love to use the power of government and the money to control the people.
The Lib's have been misusing corporate money forever, most recently by letting a non-profit corporation ACORN use their funds for political activities. Somehow, Soros is getting his money into the system to corrupt and bring down America. Now the conservative just has equal access to corporate money.
If we lose Freedom of Speech, we have lost EVERYTHING!
There is no white flag here ..you and JohnK144 are right we ALL must jump on our rooftops, scream, yell, wave our weapons and must make ourselves heard..thanks
it can sure take your voice away, just like now.
corp no.. the people involved as individuals can for they are the ones with free speech.
I will not allow a non American a voice in the election process for they have no rights.
A corp has no free speech. a person does..
where in the constitution states a corp is a person?
the money of a corp can bury the truth and spread lies and there very little us common folk can do about it, thus killing the voice of a real person.
I completely agree with you.
Soon we will get all our news from NPR, PBS, & the NY Times. We will have free cable, but Keith Olberman will be on every channel 24 hours. Internet will consist only of Media Matters and MoveOn.org. Conservatives will be forced to passing notes from stall to stall in subway toilets. I just hope I don't run into Larry Craig!!!!
you agree with him?
then defend giving a voice to bin laden who could hold stock and thus a voice more powerful than those who fought against him. foreigners can play corp. look at GE and the games they are playing.
I agree games are being played but doing another wrong doesn't fix the problem it diminishes our voice.
You want fix it?
then reject both progressive government parties
To this republic there is nothing more sacred than individual freedom, for it was individual freedom an individual sacrifice the sacrifice of blood, body, and life that gave meaning and birth to a nation before a single word on a piece paper was written. Our sacred documents our soaked in the blood of individual sacrifice and thus it is individual freedom that must have priority over the money of business.
Business has no vote and thus no voice.
Business is a creation of government and thus part of government and thus no voice.
Business can not exist with out government, only trade between two individuals can and thus no voice.
Government can not exist without individual sacrifice and thus individual freedom has top priority.
When a business can bleed and die for this country then they should have a voice. Freedom has died today in dramatic fashion. The government parties have officially silenced the voters and declared this republic dead.
Congress Shall Make No Law. Is that so hard to understand? You keep worrying about diminishing a real persons voice/vote and that is just what this law did. It PROTECTED Incumbents. It may not have been designed to do that but that is exactly what happened. If you want the let the Peoples Voice be heard then ANY restrictions to FREE SPEECH must be removed. Just because some of the voices that are speaking disagree, or some of them are Dangerous in your opinion that does not mean that voices that you approve of will ever get to be heard if Government Regulates Speech. The same thing goes for Public Financing of Campaigns (Code Words for Govt. Controlled Campaign Spending). If Government Controls who gets the money then it is Government who gets to say who is allowed to run.
I will lay my bet on Rush, Levin, Citizens United, Fox, etc, there really are other weapons…But if worse wins out please post locations of toilets..
The Cato Institute is more on top of this than you are. The Press is Corporate Money. NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN, are all Corporate entities and by definition they are in violation of McCain Fiengold. Why do you think that President Obama was so adamant that Fox News was not a news organization? If he could convince enough people of that then it would not take a big step to shut down Fox just before elections. Anyone who thinks that this was a bad decision does not know enough about the history and certitude of government over reach everytime they are given a little power.
john.. watch the business channels it will tell what is going on in business or call chamber of commerce and ask. BUT you don't give terrorist a voice in our election process.
As stated in the clip, media organizations already have a free rein in their political speech, and they are certainly not 'joe six-pack' entities. It's time to level the playing field!
Hear, Hear!
"Puzzled by President Obama’s threat of a “forceful response”? Wondering what sort of legislative remedies against the First Amendment are being cooked up even now by Sen. “Schemer” Schumer?"
Obama's forceful response? The man is flaccid.
He has just been emasculated and is hemmoraghing all over the Oval Office floor. Even his health care is dead and buried. Chuck U Schumer needs to go chuck himself.
they would love this ruling.. in socialism like the nazism business and the connected does far better than common folk for they only get the ovens.
I bash this ruling and I am clearly far to the right of you, unlike you I am not a progressive.
corp is not a person and thus no voice.
spin spin spin…. foreign can be part of American corp and thus who would know and thus you gave a voice to a terrorist.
once again where in the constitution gives business more voice than a real person
how will this give joe six pack more voice?
they spun it
They are not getting more voice via the Constitution. They are getting the same voice as you and I. I'll give you this much- their financial prosperity is giving them a louder voice, however- My voice is my vote and some dumb ass terrorist commercial won't win me over… again, you are not taking into consideration that you and I are not sheep. We are doing our homework and everyday more people are getting involved. The sheep have followed Mr. Obama and realized that they were being led into the wolves den. Now, the sheep are looking for a shepherd with a trusty watch dog. Luckily, many of us realize who our trusty watchdog- Foxnews along with Mr. Breitbart and his Big Sites.
You can't limit a Constitutional Freedom for everyone because it might give voice to someone with ill intentions. That's equivalent to saying no one can own a gun because it opens up the opportunity to a "bad" guy…trust me, the terrorists are already using their voice. Besides, CAIR hasn't been stopped from having their voice heard… Big Government even has an article about it.
Very pretty…however…
"If the Government is given the power to limit anyone in speech, it will eventually find the means to limit everyone in speech…"
Period…
Let freedom ring! The party of control over liberty is now, as it always has been the Democrat party. Why such a visceral reaction to this decision? It reduces their control over the people of this country whom they view as idiots. They will see, soon, who the real idiots are.
Interesting little Gallup Poll on this topic:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/125333/Public-Agrees-C...
The lefties have made it easy for the uninformed and underinformed to figure out what to support, these days, as consistently as they front for everything unAmerican and anti-American. All you have to do is pick out the things they most object to and support them and the things they are even more vociferous about, personally lobby for them. Of course, that will mean we approach all the issues with the same cerebrally necrotic approach that they do which is not a plan but it sure is fun watching them have a cow over this.
The actions GE is our problem. fiengold was a political game. pass it and you will be praised, when dies in court your not to blame.
our press is not free it is owned by corp America, be it so called left or right. I would simply prefer the truth not spin.
the biggest crime is who they silence, the truth that was not heard.
don't take my word for it just watch the next bond issue or sales tax increase to build some building or my favorite the stadium.
I seen the media completely ignore the opposition, just like the news stations on the tea party and 912 march on washington.
corp are in it for the money which is fine, but not when come to our tax dollars and they use their power to hide the truth.
property tax says you rent your property from the government
corp is property
property has no rights.
each individual american involved in a corp already has free speech.
Honestly, this ruling doesn't change any of what you are complaining about. I would even go so far as to say it will lessen the needs of corporations to donate money in shady ways. Your complaints are dealing with corporate problems before the ruling was passed. And what of this; "our press is not free it is ownded by corp America" What if the Government decided that since Foxnews is a corporation than they can not air any political opinion within 60 days of Elections….
That would indeed be having NO voice.
The importance of this ruling?
Banning Hillary the Movie?
Banning books?
Banning free speech?
What next? Government Banning the Internet? Nobody brought up, or thought of that angle, yet………….
Wouldn’t it be nice if a union could only donate as the members saw fit! Poll the members and divide the political contribution based on members wishes….It never seemed fair that a union with mostly conservative members could invest totally for a liberal candidate, but it’s done all the time.
Well money is property and comes from the government so no one should be able to spend their money ( property ) to support a candidate.. Your argument is flawed, you want the government to decide what we can hear and what we can't, let us decide what we want to hear and what we don't want to hear after all we are all grown ups !!!
Is this the point in time where we discuss the Hamas contributions to the Obama campaign…or the Chinese money for the Clintons? Talk about foreign influence!
it would not hurt my feelings, corp is created by government as non natural person seperating the owners from liability or something like that.. thus it is NOT person and has no rights
fox would then be bought by one person and ran by them. no problem there. they can run their opinions till the cows come home.
yup…
Yup.
WONDERFUL!!!!
Just look at how upset the Dims are about this ruling…aren't these the same Dims that (sarc) "so have our personal best interests at heart" lately (/sarc)…?
I'd back almost ANYTHING that provokes reactions like this from the Dims….
.
Liberal book burning is alive and well…
The only side that has engaged in censorship and book banning has been the left — although they always say its conservatives! They massively project their crime onto the other side.
examples: Hillary the Movie, Swift Boat book, religious books from public libraries, climate change skeptic research papers, climate change skeptic researchers/speakers, speech and images of Muhammed, the word "terrorists" from government discourse …… more!
.
[...] Read more at Big Journalism. [...]
I don't want foreigners or terrorist or foreign governments influncing our election process through American corp. We already have problems with illegals, terrorist and foreign influnce in this country. So lets act like grown ups and protect our country.
what is wonderful.. we open the flood gates to foriegners influncing our elections?
you want to give terrorist rights? what to give china more influnce?
who speech was limited????? a corp a piece of property…
do you like china influncing our elections???
how about bin ladin???
who owns the corps???
Oh, c'mon barb. How can you possibly defend government censorship and call other people that most vile of terms "progressive?"
Except my husband's job and out family's well-being depends upon the health of a foreign corporation. In fact, a very large chunk of the economy of an entire medium-sized town depends upon this same foreing company. If a politician is advocating support for legislation that negatively impacts that company's ability to continue operations in this country, I think they have a right to say so and explain why. Because, at the end of the day, there are many foreign businesses that do business on this soil, outsourcing jobs to America and helping keep the American economy and people going.
Freedom of speech is freedom of speech. You can't somehow designate that some interests are somehow more worthy than others. I guess it'll be up to you to determine the source and validity of the message just like it is now. I'm sorry if you think you should be spared that responsibility. I shoulder it proudly.
You do realize that the vast majority of small businesses and small non-profits are incorporated, right? Even the little mom and pop businesses incorporate themselves for tax purposes. Would you have these millions of people silenced in the political arena just to shut up the larger corporations?
And do you really believe that the really large corporations weren't purchasing influence within the government because of McCain-Feingold? I'm telling you the only voices that were being silenced by that stupid law were the very "real people" you think you're defending.
Think about it.
who speech is limited? the share holders?
they already protected,
Are we trying to protect the free speech of the chinese governemnt? bin ladin.
corp is property and thus has no rights other than those granted by the government, and taken away no persons rights are infringed.
Cato?? spin factory, their words mean no more or less than yours or mine.
using your words,.
IS this so hard to understand corp is property it has no rights.. it is not a real person.
The SC got it wrong just like aboration. You and CATO is trying to give property a set of rights. The Americans involved with corps already have their rights protected, but foreigners, foreign governments or terrorist have no rights..
If a corp can not bleed and die for this country then it has no rights is that hard to understand?????
the press should not be owned by the corp.. if it influnces the election process
.
that was wrong to someone should gone to jail.
I saw the Moonbat's rant on Special Comment the other night. It was the most one-sided, delusional rant I've seen anyone ever do. The man fears corporations – even though his former, um, "masters" at GE are cozy with the Obama administration – yet he has no problems with government running the banks? Health care? Car companies?
It shows how little faith Keith and people who think as he does have in their fellow citizens. If you don't like Wal-Mart? Fine, don't shop there. It's as simple as that. You won't go to jail for it and a company could lose money if enough people CHOOSE to do so of their own will. However, with an increasing centralized government protected by laws that circumvent the First Amendment, well, THAT is a bit more tricky…
sorry foriengners have no right to free speech or the right to support a candidate or the right other than sit down and shut up. very importnat point we are taliking about influncing election process and they have no rights in that.
it is clear you like the for sale sign up in washington for that is what you advocate.. it clear you haven't spent the last year talking to your congressman or in most cases being ignored by your congressman..
"Sen. “Schemer” Schumer?""
Shyster. Senator Shyster. The poster boy for why lawyers shouldn't by allowed to be legislators. I detest him.
The importance of this ruling is it stops them from banning things, and throws a major roadblock in Mark Lloyd's path,. The plans they had to restrict talk radio are going to be hindered now.
It is their choice to incorpate to shed liablity and thus they shed the abilty to use company money.. the individual still has his voice his money to say his words no one is silenced they just can't use company money.
I said before somewhere among 3 threads fiengold was a political game not designed to stop the corruption it was strictly to buy votes from voters and let people be mad at the courts when they over turned it..
the problem will now be more blantant and I didn't spend the last year harassing congress man who ignored a whole nation just to let them design something just as stupid a fiengold so the money just keeps flowing and corruption keeps going. people look at today and cheer, but tomorrow is coming and the progressives are still in charge and something worse is going to happen.
let them fiddle around trying to solve the foriegn influnce problem it will take them decades if ever to solve.
so where was I
I understand the problems of small business and the laws in place to crush them and to kill competion, but we must neutralize big corpate money or this country will more big guy can't lose little guys are not allowed to win.
Sorry Mr Barbarian…..
When I hear the enemies of Freedom and Liberty scream and squeal like the little Animal Farm-ers they are, I know exactly who to side with…
Upholding the 1st Amendment is NEVER a bad thing in the long run…i'm most glad we have a counter-balance the the Union fraudsters, who never met a socialist they didn't like…
we are at war with the progressives, but we are also at war with big money,
the laws in place now reward big business but cripples small business.
At this time the big boys can't fail, but the little guy isn't allowed to succeed
going from worker tobusiness owner is already hard enough, but all the rule you must follow forces people to fail. when you succeed and last a couple of years then you constantly battle changes the big boys get put in place..the construction trade is the worse.
yes I battle the influnce of big corp for I am tired of the road blocks they put up.
I just spent a year being ignored by politicians who took the big money,
so cheer away my friend jump on the big corp band wagon.
soon the progressives will design another fiengold and it will keep the little guy out.
cheer away as the for sale on washington gets bigger
cheer away as government finally gets big enough to put us little commoners into the little ovens.
Maybe I'm just ignorant and naive, but I generally like corporations big and small. I still want to let the 1st Amendment to reign supreme here, NO MATTER WHAT…We'll just see what we'll see.. Maybe you'll be pleasantly surprised in the long run…
the first does ring. but not under the present condition.
gerrymandering stops me from influncing my real neighbors.
party affilation gets you ignored
unless you have big money all you get thank for your concern.
corp is also has foriegn investors even foreign governments even a terrorist or two. Are happy to give them a voice over an american who is being ignored?
make this real simple when a corp makes money is it company money or is share holder money? let pay the tax game
with this ruling why doesn't GE run for president we wouldn't want infringe on free speech
why not bin ladin for presdent we would not infringe on any of his rights
under this ruling nothing stops the chinese or the talban from forming a corp and buying a candidate. and by my understand as indivudual I can give only 2300 dollars…
lets run GE for president we don't want infringe their rights.
If the policy proposals of a candidate threatens the success of an American industry, and a corporate entity wants to inform me of this situation, I WANT TO HEAR IT. I am quite capable of researching the issue and determining for myself whether the claim holds water or not.
And let's remember that government does not "give voice" to anybody. Free speech is an expressed right, NOT to be abridged through the force of law.
remember pvt long ?http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,583613,00.htm...
I can see I am wasting my time trying to explain basic concepts to you. If you want to continue to believe as you do it is your right but that type of thinking is just a step away from Facism. We do not need Govt. to protect us from Speech or unpleasant realities. The Company Money you refer to is Share Holder Money. The vast majority of these Share Holders are 401K contributers and Individual Shares owned by Americans. Americans have a right to Free Speech. Americans have a right to hear, read, see many unpleasant and unpopular things that the Government would prefer you do not know. Yes sometimes this knowledge will also come from our enemies as well. The entire purpose is that we, as Americans, are supposed to be capable of sorting through the mess.
I'm sorry but theBarbarian has shown his nom de plur to be more real than he imagined. He has not shown the ability to think, only to keep spouting the same non-sense.
you know I remeber william long.
It was mentioned during the Arguments before the Court.
The evil terrorist has always said he was a terrorist. it was the fed that call ed him crazy to hide his ties.
I am very happy that the vast majority of the readers here understand the Importance of this ruling. There is still more that needs to be done but if the right cases can be brought before the Supreme Court it can and will change. This Supreme Court has shown to be willing to go against decades of percieved liberal wisdom. Remember the Washington Gun Rights Case? Freedom is a messy business and with no warantee. It is up to the citizens to keep that freedom alive. That is the real blessing of the Internet and sites like this.
If this isn't dug out at the roots we're not going to get very far defending even something as basic as freedom of speech.
The roots, the foundation of the rot, is in the notion that the purpose of the Constitution is fairness rather than freedom.
You know, actually… it's pretty close to exchanging some feel good "What would Jesus do?" for study of scripture and doctrine. (I know that some people think that's useful, but it's *lazy*.)
What the Constitution actually says, matters. Liberty and freedom actually matter. The defense of our liberty matters. But people have become lazy. Instead of adhering to the words and principles that are there they've exchanged it for what seems fair or sounds right. If something isn't *fair* then the Constitution can't actually mean that's the way it's supposed to be, right?
Wrong. Lazy and wrong. But that's what we've seen over the last how many years beginning with laws criminalizing speech as hate crimes, or criminalizing and punishing the expression of wrong thoughts on campuses… anyone paying attention has heard the earnest claim more than once that… "Free speech is not offensive speech."
Of course it is.
No speech is free if only approved speech is allowed.
And now with this… it's the *fairness* principle, and now it is that "free speech" requires shutting everyone else up so you can be heard. See… if other, perhaps louder, speech is going on that isn't fair. So those voices have to be silenced or our speech isn't free.
Maybe someone can be more pithy and direct than I can about this… the errors are three… "The Constitution is about Fairness and not Liberty." "Free speech is not offensive speech." and "Free speech requires silencing louder voices."
It's tempting to just blast people for being idiots, but political dialog and thought has been so shallow and our lives have been so comfortable that no one really knows in their gut the value of Liberty. So they need to be told. Not just that the three errors I mentioned are wrong, but that free speech and liberty have a purpose worth the discomfort.
Push back, but educate as well.
Speech can never be free if only approved speech is allowed.
just pointing out the facts.
you are the dancer. did you know even after this ruling individual can still only contribute 2300..
right of a person to a corp, is ridiculus.
the business and connected do well under nazism not us little people we just get the ovens.
Any Individual, Group, Billionaire can use as much money as they like to run an advocacy ad. What we are talking about is NOT donations to Candidates. The amount that can be donated to Candidates HAS NOT CHANGED. It is still the same amount for any Individual or Corporation at $2300.00. You do not even have your facts right.
I do not know why I bother to respond except to correct the disinformation you post.
Well Said. I only hope that a few people can understand what you said and think about it instead of just spouting non-sense.
When this was first announced, I wasn't sure what it meant. But once I found out Obama and Olberman were angry about it, I knew it must be good.
A corporation is NOT property. A corporation has no Physical Being. A Corporation is for all intents a non-corpreal manifistation of a person, a legal fiction if you will. It is used because there is no other way to fairly reresent the interests of the Owners/Shareholders. Corporations pay taxes just like people do. Corporations have intrests just like people do. The difference is Corporations cannot vote. A Corporation can own property but in order to buy a Corporation People must sell it. People should be able to have thier property rights protected and one way of doing that is to make sure that voters are infromed when bad Legislation that will cause People to lose thier jobs and other consequences should be informed. McCain/Fiengold did not allow this to happen. Keep thinking the way you do if you want to it does not make it right.
Maybe I'm just ignorant and naive, but I generally like corporations big and small. I still want to let the 1st Amendment to reign supreme here, NO MATTER WHAT…We'll just see what we'll see.. Maybe you'll be pleasantly surprised in the long run…
corp is tax for being a corp. they are also taxed because they exist. if you prefer it is a fee
property is taxed , people are not. we are dealing with this in health care. a person is not taxed just because they exist.
if your corp is in trouble then the people of that corp can use their own money to defend their investment, but not company money. they gave up that right when they incorporated to limit their liability..IT IS COMPANY MONEY. not their money. once you use it for political gain then that is a voice to influnce an election and ONLY people have that right.
a corp is not a person and has no rights.
are you happy to have foriegners influnce our elections?
I dont know all the facts. I do know that I work for a corporation that is under constant attack by the govt. and enviromental groups that have a voice in our election procces. Groups that have been allowed to indocternate our children against them. Corporations are made up of more than just board members thier made up of guys like me who work for them. I dont have the resources to fight these groups but the corp. I work for does. Its almost like gun control in my opinion. If you take guns away the only people that will have them are criminals. This ruling has armed many corporations to fight back and let not only thier voice be heard but mine as well.
The reason you respond is you know I am right
Then again it doesn’t matter what I think or say because my voice doesn’t matter anymore , because of this ruling.
I just heard president GE say turn on the ovens, I hope you find comfort in those words as the flames whip around your feet.
Did I hear this correctly, did a Court in the United States of America, actually stand on the side of the owners of America, it's Citizenry? Hallelujah, rejoice for the moment, the Devil himself, has been stricken……expect retaliation!!!!! Those seeking control over humankind will not let this setback stand for long, they're in their "Club houses" (Think tanks, and Secret Societies) right now conjuring new ways around this atrocity (In their minds), adamantly rummaging though the unlimited vaults of deceitful paths to the goals they seek of "Dominion" over humankind!!!
Sadly, there are other intrusions on free speech at the state and local level. For example, local governments have tried to intimidate individuals or businesses from displaying simple yard signs by candidates, such as by passing ordinanances to restrict the display of signs (even on private property – not just in public easements). They have literally threatened to prosecute and fine violators – instead of just asking that signs be removed. Public works officials routinely patrol the streets at election time to remove signs (especially of candidates they don't support). By what authority do local governments infringe on free political speech in this manner? Answer – like the federal bureaucracy, they have just arrogated creeping powers to themselves to regulate whatever they please. Unless somebody actually makes a federal case out of it (literally), these petty tyrants get to enforce their own mandates.
Who cares?
I'd rather have to hear speech I dislike from those I despise than to have our freedoms abridged in any way. Free speech requires that speech actually be free. I don't get to try to shut up those I don't like or who I think are evil. In exchange I strengthen my right to speak without someone else deciding that what I have to say is bad or evil.
Free speech is not free if it means shutting up all the wrong voices so that the right voices can be heard.
You're focused on the source of the speech… our Constitution doesn't allow us to restrict speech we don't like in favor of speech from sources we find acceptable.
How can ANYONE doubt that our fine "Law Enforcement" will ensure the protection of the First Amendment for all? Who could possibly think they would allow "a free press" to be interpreted as solely the LameStreamMedia such as the New York Slimes or ABCNNBCBS instead of also including Billy Joe Bubba Bob publishing the Eufaula Sunshine Mobile Home Park Times Gazette? And of course, they'll ABSOLUTELY honor their oaths to "preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic" instead of just bowing and scraping before their Masters and then doing whatever they're told. After all, they clearly are HONORABLE men and women, are they not?
Remember folks! 4 Liberal appointees voted for the gov't power use of this power. Scary!!!!
What stunned me most about this decision was that there were 4 justices that almost succeeded in banning free speech in America! And most stunning still — how did they end up on the Supreme Court.
This decision was a revelation about the real skeleton in the closet and true agenda of left-wing America — that they ultimately HATE free speech!
You must be logged in to post a comment.