Democrats vs 1st Amendment

@speakeasy (4215)
United States
October 11, 2008 12:12pm CST
When I was younger the Democratic Party (liberals) were the defender of the 1st Amendment; everyone should have the right to speak their mind without fear of retaliation. The Republican Party (conservatives) were the "bad guys/evil empire" who wanted to restrict a person's right to freedom of speach to prevent liberals from saying anything that might disagree with the conservative point of view. Well, that has now completely reversed itself. The Democrats ar enow ONLY supporting freedom of speech IF is supports them and they are trying to restrict this right for any one who disagrees with them. "when conservative Stanley Kurtz appeared on Milt Rosenberg's WGN radio program in Chicago" Obama supporters who had been alerted by Obama's campaign headquarters flooded the WGN phone lines with protests. Yes, they have the right to say they disagree; but, they are trying to prevent others from exercising their right to free speech. "Other Obama supporters have threatened critics with criminal prosecution." So, if you exercise your right of free speech and what you say is at odds with Obama, they are going to tie you up in frivolous litigation which will cost you a small fortune in defense fees and waste a lot of your time. "Saturday Night Live" ran a spoof of the financial crisis that skewered Democrats like House Financial Services Chairman Barney Frank and liberal contributors Herbert and Marion Sandler, who sold toxic-waste-filled Golden West to Wachovia Bank for $24 billion. Kind of surprising, but not for long. The tape of the broadcast disappeared from NBC's Website and was replaced with another that omitted the references to Frank and the Sandlers." But, hasn't Saturday Night Live been attacking the McCain/Palin team with complete freedom. Attacking conservatives is OK; but attacking liberals who commit serious offenses is not? "Democrats' "card check" legislation, which would abolish secret ballot elections in determining whether employees are represented by unions." The whole reason behind secret ballots is so that no one can come back and threaten a person for voting for or against unions. Free speech is not FREE if union officials or companies can send some one around later to harrass you for the way you cast your vote! This is just a quick sample of some of the ways that the Democrats (one time defenders of the 1st Amendment) have been restricting free speech for other people. Here is a link to more information about what is going on - http://www.arcamax.com/politics/s-423788-890503 What do you think - is this a problem or is it OK?
1 person likes this
3 responses
@greysfreak (1385)
• United States
12 Oct 08
I have to agree, I used to think that democrats were for freedom of speech and other things of that sort. But it's true, these days it's so different. Not long ago I thought I was hardcore liberal, but this election has truly made me think about it. And I believe I've actually really been independent all along. Since I've been listening to both sides and really thinking about what I hear, I realized that I can agree with one side on one issue and the other side on another issue--and even then, I can understand why the opposite side thinks a certain way. I am so sad to see how individuality and thinking for ones self is going out the window more and more each day. Here's the thing--I completely hate racist remarks, I don't use them, I won't even say the "n" word for any reason, even to say I object it. In 2006 when they were having Senate/Governor elections I was following Tennessee because there was a chance they could have, I believe they said, the first Southern state, African American senator since Reconstruction. I was really pulling for him, although I was still living in Maryland then! He didn't win though. Fast forward to now, I think it would be great if there was a president who was black--or any other race! And while I do think Obama is probably a smart guy, I really don't think he is what this country needs in a time of 2 wars, and sinking economy. None of my reasoning has anything to do with his race. If I was supporting someone based on race alone, sure--I'd be like it's a great thing. But I don't think it's right to just elect someone president because for equalities' sake. This is the highest office, and honestly, I don't think the president should necessarily be someone foreign countries endorse, they should fear the president, then maybe they won't try anything. Respect is more important than liking. And even I as a non-Republican have to say this, I wouldn't have chosen to have the war happen, but we are there now, and I want to see it end, but practically and safely. McCain has been there, if he was to send a million more young people off to war, I know that he has been there--he knows what he is sending them to. Back to freedom of speech, it really does sadden me that it has come to this. What I see is more divisive politics, you either support Obama or you are called racist. Oh yes, that is something I'm looking forward to for the next 4 years.. umm.. NOT! Other than freedom of speech, there are other areas that I used to associate with republicans, that now seem to be more readily applied to the extreme left, especially. It is so disturbing to wake up and realize that everything you thought you were for, is so much different when you actually learn about it and read about it. Almost makes me wish I was blinded to reality. But the truth is, I don't let the media tell me how to dress, what music to listen to or anything else--so I'm certainly not going to let them tell me who I should agree with. I'm not sure I totally agree with McCain, but I can't help but worry how things will be if Obama does some of the things he wants to do. I hope I'm just worrying for nothing. Sorry this was so long and slightly off topic at places, but I tend to be wordy--especially since it seems if you are vague lately people read into things and accuse you of being dumb or racist. Which neither are who I am.
@speakeasy (4215)
• United States
13 Oct 08
Personally, I consider myself to be a "moderate". I am extremely "liberal" about some things and "conservative" about others; but, I mainly believe that the middle ground is best and neither extreme is 100% correct. This world is actually "shades of gray"; not "black and white". I am against Obama because of his record; the things he has said and done; and his lack of experience. Just because my skin is pink and his is a dark brown; doesn't make me a racist if I do not support him. I have literally traveled around the world and lived in foreign countries in the past and I have friends who are all different skin tones. They would definately have a good laugh if they knew someone called me a racist. But, this trend to try to suppress free speech in anyone who disagrees with these people is very scary. Especially, since I have seen politicians pull the wool over the public's eyes many times in the past (Bush's 2nd term in office is a good example) and I worry that it will happen again in this election. If that happens and we end up with Obama as President and even more Democrats in Congress; we may not have any right to free speech at the end of his term in office.
@piasabird (1737)
• United States
11 Oct 08
I have noticed this for years now. The main tactic for shutting up people who speak against Obama is to call them a racist. Yep, just call them a racist and/or a bigot and that usually shuts them down.
@Taskr36 (13924)
• United States
11 Oct 08
That's because all us white folks are racists. That's why we use code-words like "That one", "Joe Six-pack", and "Hockey Mom". Thank god we were all issued racist decoder rings as children.
@piasabird (1737)
• United States
11 Oct 08
I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy," Biden said. "I mean, that's a storybook, man." Just let a Republican make a statement like that and see what happens. But if it's a Democrat all is forgiven and you ask him to run on the same ticket as your VP. LOL
@speakeasy (4215)
• United States
11 Oct 08
Ah, but, this goes above and beyond that. This is not just an Obama/race thing; this is pervasive throughout the Democratic party. Right now, we already have a Democratic majority in Congress - increasing the size of that Democratic majority and topping it off with a Democratic President - doesn't bode well for the 1st amendment. After all, a President can only do so much by himself. Congress is the one who actaully makes and passes bills. Yes, Bush has done some dumb things in his past 8 years; but, for the last 4 years a Democratic majority in Congress has been there hand in hand helping him make this mess we currently have. With a Democratic President and a Democratic Congress; we may find that simple discussions of those policies and politicians (like this one) could bring legal actions against us.
@Taskr36 (13924)
• United States
11 Oct 08
Well many democrats use freedom of speech only when it benefits them. I've consistently seen them use it as a tool to prevent the freedom they claim is important to them. They can say something stupid or offensive, and when their statement is criticized, they say it's their freedom of speech so you can't criticize them. See how that works? They simultaneously use it to defend their statements, while using it to imply that you aren't allowed to make your own. It's a fascinating circular logic.
@piasabird (1737)
• United States
11 Oct 08
Yes, is is fascinating when you really think about it. I usually have them attack my intelligence, too. Because Lord knows, if you don't think like them you're just not smart enough to understand.Then they try to be helpful and point you in the right direction to where they feel you should go. lol