First Amendment, Annulled

“Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people to peacefully assemble and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”

That’s a fairly powerful first amendment to the Constitution- I can see why they led with what is probably the most powerful statement on what is PROHIBITED to the government in terms of action, but in the coming weeks, you will see the Barama government try an end- around on this amendment, as they attempt to re institute the “fairness doctrine”, a term for an action that is anything but fair. Oh, they will relabel the doctrine, but the result will be the same.

This is an attempt to silence talk radio, and the likes of Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity, as well as countless others, most of whom are conservative, and therein lies the crux of the problem as the Uberlibs see it. They are embarrassed that liberal talk radio fails every time. Take the Ultra- Leftist radio network  Air America for example- programs hosted by Al Franken and Janene Garofalo were so bad , that the whole radio network failed, went bankrupt not once, but twice, and would have failed faster if it wasn’t for Uberlib George Soros, a fairly rich man with more money than sense. He kept the station afloat financially, desperately hoping that the ranting babies on air might gain traction.

Well. that experiment failed, and by and large uberlib radio always will fail, because they have no redeemable message to speak of.

So now they turn to government interference in the free market, by instituting what they call “localization”, meaning a contrasting viewpoint must be presented, with an equal amount of time, FREE OF CHARGE, to “rebut” any viewpoint that the radio has paid for. This interferes with the free market, because if the people wanted another viewpoint, they would pay for it.

Radio knows what pays, and they would broadcast 24/7 whale sounds if they thought there would be a profit on it. There isn’t, so they won’t.  That is how the free market works, when it doesn’t have government’s heavy hand messing with it.

And now, newspapers are finding out that leftist thought doesn’t sell, and many are going out of business. So, what do these failing business models do? Why, ask for a bailout, bless their little hearts. Now, if they get the bailouts, they will be government controlled. Does ANYONE think a government controlled press is a good thing? I am pretty darn sure that this “abridges the freedom of the press”.  It certainly casts doubt on the impartiality of the press that takes the money.

And now we come to the crux of the mater, the crown jewel in “Government control”- the Internet. Does the thought of controlling the Internet send a “thrill up YOUR leg?” It will happen, mark my words, in the name of “protecting our children”, or some such feel- good theme, and ironically, the ACLU and some other allegedly freedom- loving “rights” advocates, will be slow to realize that they have backed a tyrant, a Type A controlling government that will not hesitate to control them if they get out of line.

Control of the internet would absolutely stifle liberty and freedom as we know it, because freedom of speech is the freedom to say that a government is not doing its job, a freedom to criticize, and if the government can control what information is shared, then it might not control the hearts, but it begins to control the minds. This is NOT a good thing, I find it ironic that the Fascistic controls that many on the left thought  would happen on President Bush’s watch, are happening now, under King Barama the First.

These controls and changes are happening slowly, though- that is how you slide things by people, draw their attention away from them with little stuff, while you slip the big stuff in as their attention is distracted. It’s all misdirection, and Barama is the magician.

This is not the only Amendment to the Constitution that is in trouble, it is just literally the First one, because after this one, abridging or eliminating the others would be easier.

The First Amendment is the Keystone Amendment, the one without which, all the others stand on shifting ground. 

Without free speech, bad ideas begin to sound good, and lies can and will proliferate, because there is no dissenting viewpoint allowed. And bad ideas, as we are seeing now, could be the death of our country. 

This would be the end of the world, because, contrary to what Uberlibs believe, it is the United States that holds the world together. With a weakened U.S., there would surely be a World War, but this time there will be nukes.

If that is the endgame of this administration,they have made a good start.

Big Dog

[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.

36 Responses to “First Amendment, Annulled”

  1. Kris says:

    Very well said. I honestly think they are arrogant enough to believe the country will be stronger when their opinion is the only one available.

  2. Blake says:

    As an adjunct to my commentary here, let me just say that today is San Jacinto day, the day that Texas actually won her freedom from the Tyranny of Mexican rule. Now, I haven’t seen a paper today, but I can pretty well predict that this event will be noted, if at all, on page 16 or 23- way back in the back, because God Forbid we offend Hispanics.
    This might not bother me if these same papers didn’t tout Cinco De Mayo, a Mexican holiday, on the front page every year. This double standard whereby our native American and Texan holidays are minimized, while other, non- American holidays are celebrated really ticks me off.
    Either celebrate them all the same, or not at all.
    Columbus Day is another example- we might hurt the Native Americans- Jesus!
    They’re taking back America, as one comedian said, one nickel at a time, with their casinos.

  3. Merry says:

    The Pentagon is now practicing this silencing of free speech and assembly in Pakistan by jamming radio and blocking chat rooms and web sites. (See Wall St. Journal front page Saturday 4/18). All well and good to silence and disrupt the Taliban, but it sent a chill through me knowing that this illegal administration of the illegal POTUS Hussein wants to silence the speech and rights of assembly of Americans such as me. When Hussein figures out how to jam and prohibit freedom there, he will loose little time in bringing those techniques here.

    • Blake says:

      Unfortunately, Merry, this administration is not illegal, although what they do may very well turn out to be illegal. They like to do end- arounds- instead of tackling an issue head on, they go after a small but vital part of the whole.
      An example- Barama will not bring back the assault weapons ban, but if he can tax the ammo so as to make it impossible to buy, well…….
      This is how they operate, so with these people, you need real good peripheral vision.

      • Schatzee says:

        I don’t know if it’s legal or not – he refuses to show me his qualifications and has spent obscene amounts of money to keep those of us deserving of that knowledge from it. I respect Merry’s right to claim they are illegal until they prove otherwise. I have no beef with that at all.

        • Blake says:

          While I agree that King Barama’s “transparency” has been nothing more than a vapid talking point, I hesitate to use the term “illegal”- I will however, freely use the term immoral when describing his administration.

        • In on it not says:

          I have to agree with Blake. Obama’s credentials are highly questionable, it is dishonest thay he remains reticient about discloser, and it is not the behavior we hope to see in a President.
          But illegal is a word that has a definition, and this isn’t it.
          If Lord Obama actually broke the law, someone would be filing a case, I expect.

          Remember, the Liberati used the same phrase to attack Bush, the elections and every move he made.
          Sane and Rational people should avoid doing anything the liberals do!
          If want to “not be like them,” then we have to not be like them.

        • Adam says:

          I actually have to agree with In on it not here. I look back and see all the mistakes liberals made and even I made in terms of how people talked about Bush. It’s like too many conservatives launch into the very attacks they condemned liberals for in the last 8 years and then when confronted about it they say “I’m not doing anything your side didn’t do” as if that makes up for the hypocrisy.

          So far we’ve seen conservatives make each of the following attacks that mirror attacks on Bush too much:

          Step 1: Question the election even though the margin was too large in too many states for Obama and ACORN to have stolen it.

          Step 2: Call Obama a failure before he’s even taken the oath of office.

          Step 3: Attack the way Obama speaks, claim he’s only a good speaker with a teleprompter even though he’s given many fine speeches without one.

          Step 4: Accuse Obama of expanding executive power too much and wanting too much control, ignoring the unprecedented expansion of power by Bush and Cheney.

          Step 5: Call Obama a nazi or a fascist and compare him to Hitler.

          This is all I can think of but I’m sure there are more.

          I’m all for dissent against the President but too many times lately it feels like conservatives are just reading from the liberal playbook to attack Obama without really putting much thought into it.

        • Blake says:

          1, I don’t question the election- when I talk about ACORN, i am speaking about an organization that does engage in fraud, although I don’t think they stole the election, they surely padded the numbers, but we will see on that score.
          2. I haven’t called Barama a failure- yet. Time will tell on that front.
          3. Face it Adam, he DOES like his teleprompter- that way he stays on message. I have heard him “wander”, as he spoke off the cuff, and its not pretty- kinda reminds me of Bush (without the Bushisms).
          4. Its not so much that Barama has expanded executive power, but one of his campaign promises was to shrink executive power- the trouble with that, is Barry LIKES it- once you are in the office, you don’t want to give up any power, so he is keeping every bit of what Bush had, and if he can get more, he’ll take it. I would have thought however, even a Democratic Congress, jealous of its own turf, would not have rolled over like a whipped dog to the executive office, but told Barama where he has to stop. So far, that is not the case.
          5. I don’t think he is Hitler- I do think that a lot of what he is attempting to do can easily lead that direction, so I am concerned about his mental capacity- I would think that is a direction EVERYBODY would steer clear of.
          I do find it amusing that Democrats are begging the people to give Barama a chance, though, when these same beggars said and did the most vile things to and about Bush. While two wrongs do not make a right, it’s kinda like getting sucker- punched, and then the puncher declares that the fight is over. Really? Some might not think so.

        • Adam says:

          I hadn’t really seen you say much on any of the numbers yet in the short time that I’ve read your writing. Don’t take it as a broad stroke against conservatives but just a general outline of what I’m hearing conservatives say. I think there are legitimate criticisms of Obama but that I’m not seeing many yet because it seems conservatives are stuck using the same attacks made on Bush for some reason…

  4. Adam says:

    Kris wrote: “Very well said.” I would say very well said, yet so poorly sourced.

    Other than the thoughts or words of a few stray politicians where is your evidence to suggest Obama either supports or plans to try to institute any policy like the fairness doctrine, much less policy to somehow “control” the Internet?

    The newspapers are going to be controlled by Obama just because they take government aid? Obama isn’t even calling for bailouts of papers. Only thing I’ve seen is talk so this seems a bit far fetched as well.

    What are you basing any of these ideas on?

    As far Cinco De Mayo goes there are twice as many Hispanics in the United States as there are people in Texas and Texas has a 35% population of Hispanics. So if you don’t find San Jacinto mentioned as much as Cinco De Mayo I wouldn’t claim it had anything to do with offending Hispanics but simply that most people don’t know about or care about San Jacinto.

    • Big Dog says:

      We would not have that many Hispanics if we sent the ILLEGALS home.

    • Big Dog says:

      And Adam, San Jacinto Day is an official holiday in Texas. Cinco de Mayo is not.

      • Adam says:

        Saint Patrick’s day isn’t an official holiday in Texas either but I’m sure more people care for it than San Jacinto Day. There wouldn’t be as many Irish in Texas either if you sent them home too.

        Cinco de Mayo is a lot more popular in the US than anywhere else anyway. People would probably still care more about it than San Jacinto Day even if you somehow sent home all illegals.

        More than once I’ve seen it used as an excuse to take off early from work and drink margaritas at a bar with co-workers though neither of those days were actually the 5th of May…

        • Big Dog says:

          Well I don’t celebrate Cinco de Mayo. It celebrates a Mexican victory over the French, neither of whom I have an allegiance to. Shatzee is right. I bet you won’t find any illegal Irish in Texas.

          Perhaps more would still care for the 5th of May but the ILLEGALS would be gone so it would be celebrated by people who are here legally.

          I would rather celebrate a day that commemorates a Texas victory than one that celebrates a Mexican one.

          People will use any excuse to drink. You know, it’s 5 o’clock somewhere and all that…

        • Adam says:

          Just for the sake of argument I’ve seen data to suggest there are about 12 million illegals in the US (not sure how they tell) and that about 76% are of Hispanic origin. That means about 9 million illegals are Hispanic. Of the about 39 million Hispanics that means (assuming that 39 million is both legal and illegals) only 3.51 of 39 million are illegals. So while you are technically correct to say “we would not have that many Hispanics if we sent the ILLEGALS home” it doesn’t really say much in the end since the vast majority of Hispanics are apparently legal.

        • In on it not says:

          So Adam, which is it?
          “…9 million illegals are Hispanic. .. only 3.51 of 39 million are illegals.”

        • Adam says:

          You’re right. I botched my math. My point was simply that only a fraction of Hispanics in America are illegal (23%, not 3.51 mil) so I don’t really see the point of harping on illegals simply because I bring up how many Hispanics live in the US. Granted though 23% chunk is a little less easy to shrug off as the bogus 3.51 mil figure I came up with.

        • Blake says:

          The point I was trying (and apparently failing at) was not that I dislike the Cinco de Mayo holiday- it is when libs decide to minimize the San Jacinto holiday, a recognized holiday in Texas (the same thing was done over March 6- the fall of the Alamo), and attempt to elevate the foreign holiday instead, in a lame attempt to, I guess, cozy up to the Hispanics in a naked try for their vote. They think, I guess, that a holiday that celebrates a victory over the Mexicans is just too politically incorrect, and that hypocrisy ticks me off.
          History is what it is- deal with it.

        • Adam says:

          I think I understood your point fine. I just don’t see the evidence to blame it on liberals when you’re talking about a day most people don’t know about or care about compared to a day that is known throughout the United States and Latin America. If you think they are ignoring it to cozy with Hispanics where is your evidence?

          Also where is your evidence that Obama supports or will attempt anything like the fairness doctrine, will try and control the internet, and will control news papers? I’m not seeing any evidence cited for that either, just opinion.

        • Blake says:

          The newspapers, a good 90% of them ,already lean left, so the control would not be the oppressive type, “You vill do vat ve say!” but would be more subtle than this.
          As to the fairness doctrine, it would be Congress that tried to do this, and Pelosi the meth head has already indicated her willingness to do so. The internet is an extension of this in that it did not exist in the form it is now, the last time the fairness doctrine was in force. If China can do it, well……
          The one thing you might not have taken into account is that by the time there are irrefutable facts, the Doctrine could be a law. Now that would be a fact I would not care to see.
          “All The News That Obama Sees Fit To Print” is not a good banner for any news organization.
          Awareness is kind of like a gun, its better to have it and not need it, than to need it and not have it.

        • Adam says:

          Can you cite me something to show what you are basing your ideas on?

        • Blake says:

          If there was data showing the exact percentage of papers that are liberal, then these papers could no longer claim to be unbiased.
          It’s kind of like being a fishmonger- the fish might look good, but you just know when it begins to stink.

  5. Schatzee says:

    I bet most of the Irish here came here legally and are actual citizens, not criminals and stow aways.

  6. Barbara says:

    When Obama finally gets full control of America, can we all watch Adam cry?????

  7. Adam says:

    Barbara:

    When Obama leaves after 4 or 8 years and the stock market is higher, employment is stronger, deficits are on the decline, and all your conspiracy theories and crazy paranoia are proven jokes, I’ll be here waiting for your apology for being so rude.

    • In on it not says:

      You will continue to wait, just as we wait for your apology for being rude to GWB.

      As for improved economic and social situations resulting from L.O.B.’s reign, you are smart enough to know one can’t cure problems with the same stratagies that created the problems…

      • Adam says:

        First we need to outline what you think the problems in our country are. Next we can talk about what Obama is doing and why that makes it worse.

        • Blake says:

          In a nutshell, the problems are as follows: There is a correction in the free market, because all up and down the line, people got too greedy.
          Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, and others got too greedy for votes, and loosened the regs of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac- the poor people got greedy and wanted a house beyond their means- the banks, having their bad loans guaranteed by the FMs, had no downside to making those bad loans, so they got greedy, and finally, all those bad loans were bundled into securities that were then sold to others, thus spreading the virus. Got that, so far Adam?
          Now, as to what Barama is doing wrong, oh WHERE to begin?
          The free market needs to correct its course itself, with NO help from the government. He is wrong to prop up the banks, the mortgages, any of it. The government should not (but is) take shares of banks, thus taking control of these banks. Name one thing the government does well. It’s not managing money that’s for sure.
          When you control the free market, it’s not free.
          When Franks, and Dodd, and Schumer, et al loosened the regs, they created a monster, and they are the single most liable people responsible for this FUBAR situation.
          Regulations are there to protect both parties, and these regs were thought out over a long time. To tilt them in favor of one side or the other has the effect you now see.
          What Barama is doing will at best, prolong this malaise, and at worst, radically change our way of life as it has existed for a long time.
          Is that enough of an outline for you, Adam?

        • Adam says:

          I was looking more for In on it not to outline his or her thoughts but I’ll talk about yours too.

          I haven’t really seen Frank blamed for deregulation, just blamed for supposedly blocking the passing of regulation but maybe you can go into that more in depth. What regulations did they loosen?

          Your time line is a little off I think. The securities actually lead to more bad loans being made, not the other way around. Here is a good video about the credit crisis.

        • Blake says:

          Barney Frank, as lead Democrat on the House Finance committee, told the FMs to lower the requirements for guaranteeing the loans made to risky lenders, thus lowering the bar, or threshhold for these loans to be guaranteed by the FMs. Meanwhile ACORN and other activist groups pressured banks to make riskier loans. But the key was when the FMs guaranteed the loans, and securities firms could bundle and sell them, there was no risk for the banks themselves.
          Now, I could load up this answer with links to go here or there, but that would take up too much space, and I believe you are intelligent enough to find the truth if you wish.
          I will point to ANY video re; Barney Frank and Fannie Mae- google those and see what comes up- it’s damning to Frank, and to many of the others. Heck google Bill Clinton and Fannie Mae, and you will find him also saying that the Democrats are at fault.

    • Blake says:

      I’m waiting for your apology on Bush- you first.
      Bush has done only one thing I completely disagree with, began this slide into the bailouts, and he was trying to actually transition into King Barama’s reign- uh, “term”- so,you apologize for your treatment of Bush, and we’ll see about the Kingfish.

      • Adam says:

        Bush was an utter failure. What should I apologize for? It doesn’t matter what you disagreed with Bush for. The truth of the matter is the vast majority of Americans were displeased with his job.

        So far the only people who hate Obama’s job are the only people who still supported Bush even though he sucked. So that’s a credibility issue right there.

        So while Barbara waits around for armageddon and the end of the world and for me to “cry” about it, I’ll wait patiently for Barbara to come clean about her utter lunacy and conspiracy as the sun actually rises after Obama’s term as president is up and the conditions in the US are actually improving. But of course I won’t hold my breath…

        • Blake says:

          You think Bush was an utter failure, but time will tell- he did things I didn’t approve of, but he did a lot that was right, even though you disapprove, just as we disapprove of Barama, and believe that he has 666 tattooed somewhere, probably on his butt, so we have a divide here, and I believe you will find more people distrust Barama than you think. Perhaps you should leave the Demo- pod, and see the real world.

        • Adam says:

          Leave my Demo- pod for the real world? That’s rich. Why would I want to step into a world that lets you ignore the overwhelming disapproval of Bush’s policies and the general approval of Obama’s policies so far in order to pretend that up is down and right is wrong and Bush was actually a good president and Obama is the miserable failure? Sorry pal. You won’t find me living in any world like that…

        • Blake says:

          The oNE thing a government MUST do is provide security for the Nation, and while there was the lapse of 9/11, (due to the “firewalls” that Clinton instituted, prohibiting agencies from sharing info), Bush’s people had kept us safe- you can argue the techniques, but the end result was a secure nation.
          As to Katrina, although there is enough blame to go around, the Posse Comitatus act specifically prohibited the federal governmentfrom unilaterally going into a state, and taking charge. The federal government has to be ASKED in by the governor, who took THREE days to do so, despite being asked by Bush.
          One can only surmise that Gov. Blanco’s dislike of the Republican president was the reason that she allowed the situation to become as bad as it became.
          Then there are the levees- true, they are overseen by U.S. Corps of Engineers, but the money for their upkeep was given to the state, and noone knows where it went. It surely wasn’t used for upkeep.
          Now Barama has declassified the memos on “torture”, thus letting the terrorists know what we can now NOT do- they have to be laughing their a$$ off.
          Cheney is right- the rest of the memos, telling what intel we got off of these sc**bags, should be made public. It is disingenuous at the least to tell only one side of a story.