Posts Tagged ‘First Amendment’

h1

Obama’s Ice Age: The Chilling of Speech

June 9, 2009

I got wind of a story yesterday during  a local (Las Vegas, NV) AM radio show that may be the inspiration of an Orwellian sequal called 1985…or 1984 part II. 

Apparently, some comments on the Las VegasReview-Journal’s blog site have ruffled some feathers at the US Attorney’s Office.  None of the comments were criminal, libelous, nor did they seem to incite a clear and present danger to anyone.  The comments were normal for any online blog or website.  However, according to the Review-Journal, a Federal subpoena mandated the presentation of the:

full name, date of birth, physical address, gender, ZIP code, password prompts, security questions, telephone numbers and other identifiers … the IP address,” of all commenters on a certain post.

The Review Journal has decided to fight the subpoena “tooth and nail”.  For starters, the majority of the commenting public use pseudonyms, fake e-mail addresses, and the RJ does not require registration to comment; i.e., physical addresses, names, phone numbers (etc.).  It is impossible to find this information.  Further, these subpoenas will have a chilling effect on public discourse, and are in direct violation of the Supreme Court and the US Constitution’s views on the Freedom of Speech and the internet. 

Unlike child pornography and terorrist websites, the government does not have a compelling governmental interest in what I comment on the Las Vegas Review Journal or what websites I have visited.  This is in direct violation of everything the First Amendment stands for; public discourse.  I hope the Review Journal stands up for my liberties and rights as an American Citizen.  I enjoy participating in local politics and I have commented many times on such websites.  If these subpoenas are allowed, a horrible precedent would be set for future Federal Magistrates regarding subpoenas and warrants.  People will stop commenting and participating.  I agree that many of the posts are ignorant and have little to say, but the First Amendment is very clear

Congress shall make NO law respecting . . . or abridging the freedom of speech.

No sign of the ACLU just yet. 

-reagan21

Advertisements
h1

WE NEED CHANGE…read as “the Democrats need a one party rule”***UPDATE***

October 29, 2008

I guess it won’t be that hard to reach across the aisle after all.  Pelosi and Reid have announced that a one party rule of the White House and Congress will create bipartisanship.  Republicans do not agree.  Although I think the mid-term election of 2006 was on the shoulders of the GOP and the war in Iraq (at that time), I cannot understand how a one party rule will create a bipartisan utopia on Capitol Hill.

Now comes Senator Schumer, to explain to us how and why a one party rule will actually help this country in a time of Change

From National Journal/CongressDaily

[Republicans] can’t win on domestic policy; they can’t win on foreign policy; they can’t win on sort of trying to tag our candidates; so the latest theme is, ‘Oh, let’s have some balance in government. Let’s have divided government,’ ” Schumer said at a press briefing. “Our view is very simple, and that is Republican senators, Republican incumbents aren’t for checks and balances. They’re for blocking change and backing [President] Bush.”

OK, Senator Schumer, using your logic you and the Democrats are not for change of this country but to push and back Obama’s socilaist platform.  Or Democrats were only for blocking numerous bills and judicial nominees during the last 8 years.  Remember the filabuster and the Nuclear option?  Ring any bells?

The legislative process was created for political debate.  The way you imagine democracy is not a democracy at all.  That would be called a Monarchy…at best.  The king Obama, who rules with out disagreeance, the Lords, the Legislature, who only look at the best interest of the King and who are unopposed by any other being.  The future of any entity thrives on debate.  It is only through debate where innovation can take life.  POLITICAL DEBATE is what makes this country great.  It is the basis for “Free Speech” in the First Amendment. 

It is through debate that helped form my political views. At my High School the Republicans/conservatives were mocked.  In Government class my senior year, we completed a questionnaire which would tell us where stood politically.  I purposely answered so I would be deemed a moderate, just because I did not want to be a democrat or republican.  It was not until later, in my college classes, where debate was unfettered.  I heard things which forced me to research different ideas and ideologies.  It was through this research that I became a conservative.  Not because of my friends or family, but because political debate asked me to question what my core beliefs were.  Without this debate, I would still be a PC moderate, making sure not to piss anyone off.  I am glad for the liberals, socialists, communists, monarchists, and conservatives I met at UNLV (a very liberal school) who sparked my intellect.  It was through political debate which made me who I am today.   It is POLITICAL DEBATE which makes this country great. 

A reader on MM noted that Schumer warned against one party rule just three years ago: (FOX News Sunday, 4/10/05):

UPDATE  

 “And again, you can’t just have one-party rule here . . .The point is that there have to be checks and balances here. A check and a balance does not necessarily always mean a majority vote. We have 60 votes before you can do certain kinds of spending increases. The Senate is always supposed to be, Chris, the cooling saucer.”

-reagan21