Speaker Pelosi wants to change the first Amendment
By bobmnu
@bobmnu (8157)
United States
April 20, 2012 12:47pm CST
It seems that some Democrats want to Amend the Constitution to give Congress the right to regulate Political Speech. They claim it is aimed at Corporations but don't say if Unions are included as they are in the Supreme Court Decision.
http://www.twincitiesnewstalk.com/cc-common/news/sections/newsarticle.html?feed=104707&article=10066700
My problem with this is who defines "Political Speech". Is a movie made by a company that shows the assassination of a sitting president political speech? Is a company executive complaining to congress about higher taxes Political speech? Can a think tank send out information on an upcoming bill before congress trying to inform their members of what is in the bill, is that political speech? Where does it end? Will this become another EPA that can hold up a building project because of a wild plant that you can buy in any greenhouse but because it is living without any help from man it becomes a protected species?
This is a bad way to go to try to ban free speech in any form.
4 responses
@debrakcarey (19887)
• United States
20 Apr 12
OMG...
It was expressly to protect political speech that the first amendment was written!!!
bobmu, I can remark no futher or like Ted Nugent, I'll be talking to the SS.
@lilwonders456 (8214)
• United States
20 Apr 12
I have been wondering what the Trayvon case has to do with the Stand your ground law. HE followed the kid when 911 told him not to. He caused the confrontation.
why? Cause some kid was walking home from a convience store with a hoodie? We don't know who attacked who first but if I was walking home from a store and some strange guy was following me and trying to get me to stop I would assume the worst and try to get away or fight him. I don't see how this case has anything to do with the stand your ground laws at all. So therefore I don't see why the law is a problem or wrong. But try telling the press that.
@lilwonders456 (8214)
• United States
20 Apr 12
I don't know all the facts. We will find them out in court. I hope he gets a fair trial. The president should have stayed out of it and let the legal system handle it.
Personally I do feel he caused the problem when 911 told him NOT to follow him and he did anyway. The cops could have handled it and then this kid could still be alive and he could not be facing a trial.
@debrakcarey (19887)
• United States
20 Apr 12
I am not going to rehash that here.
YOU do not have all the facts. And Zimmerman deserves his day in court to tell HIS SIDE of the story that the press tried so hard to make favor MR. Martin.
I was speaking about the President's manufactured concern. His 'if I had a son....speech.
Step back and clear you mind of all the propaganda, and see the big picture.
@thegreatdebater (7316)
• United States
21 Apr 12
I haven't heard of this idea. I totally disagree with the Supreme ACTIVIST Court's decision in Citizens United, and this MAY be a way to clean this up, but it isn't the way to do it. I agree that limiting free speech is not a good thing for the country PERIOD. But, I think we all can say that Citizens United was an attack on free speech because it allowed a very small group to have MORE free speech that gets out to more people than the rest of the citizens.
I don't think this is a good idea, but we do need to find away around this Citizens United ruling before it totally destroys the country!!!!
@thegreatdebater (7316)
• United States
25 Apr 12
If liberals wanted to take talk radio off the air than why didn't they do it when they controlled the entire government? If they really wanted Rush off the air they could have done that three years ago and they didn't!!! When it comes to the Tea Party, I hear people wanting to give the other side of the story. However, I personally am NOT going to go to these right wing town hall meetings and put up with these idiots threatening to kill people because they don't agree with them!!! If that is the Tea Party you are talking about then they need to be SHUT UP!!!
@debrakcarey (19887)
• United States
23 Apr 12
But Pelosi and Reid and Maxine Waters, all Democrats seem to think we need to shut up the Tea Party and Rush Limbaugh, take talk radio off the air as well.
@debrakcarey (19887)
• United States
29 Apr 12
http://althouse.blogspot.com/2012/03/oh-travails-of-lefty-comedian-hey-did.html
@coffeebreak (17797)
• United States
20 Apr 12
That's the whole problem with this...who determines what is okay to say and what isn't? Those that want to say it say it is their right, those that don't want to say it say it is their right being violated. There is only a middle ground and the Dem's don't want to go there.
Look at TV...the language they use on there is disgusting in my opinion. I have watched dramas and sitcoms and the language they use there is inappropriate in my opinion...but it is allowed. It is everyday language these days so it can be on tv too. And the movies...have you seen the movie Casino? LIterally every third word is the F word from Joe Pessi's mouth! Does it make the movie any better? No..it makes me turn it off. Granted many use that language and don't mind but I mind...so can I sue them for offending my civil rights of free speech? Of course not.
They need to just leave the Constitution alone and deal with each inncident as it comes along. What the Dems and Congress need to do is regulate their OWN political speech and that in itself will solve a multitude of problems. They always want to tell everyone else what to do, but dont' want anyone telling them what to do!
@lilwonders456 (8214)
• United States
20 Apr 12
Free speech is just that free speech. This is a very slippery slope and one left well enough alone. I don't agree with the supreme courts decision that corporations are "people" when it comes to contributions....but with that ruling in place that means their right to free speech is very much protected. Heck even if that gets overturned (and I hope it does)....speech should never be censored...especially political speech.
People today want PC everything. Guess what...it is not against the law to say or think something that may offend someone or something others might disagree with. It shouldn't be illegal either. If it was NO ONE would be allowed to say ANYTHING but someone, somewhere would be offended by it.
