Democrats Move to Amend First Amendment
The Founding Father valued freedom of speech so highly that they placed it even before the right to bear arms in the Bill of Rights. Obviously their main concern was not the right to distribute pornography or to shout obscenities on street corners, but political speech — which is precisely what Democrats want to amend the Constitution to suppress:
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi on Thursday endorsed a movement announced by other congressional Democrats on Wednesday to ratify an amendment to the U.S. Constitution that would allow Congress to regulate political speech when it is engaged in by corporations as opposed to individuals.
The First Amendment says in part: “Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press…”
Television and radio networks, newspapers, publishing houses, movie studios and think tanks, as well as political action committees, are usually organized as, or elements of, corporations.
The idea is to overrule the Supreme Court’s no-brainer 2010 decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, in which it was affirmed that corporations have a right to produce material that expresses political views. That Democrats oppose this ruling lays to rest any doubt that they are totalitarians hostile to the most fundamental principles of liberty, and have as their objective the suppression of all speech that does not advance their corrosive agenda.
The Great One weighs in on Demorrhoids’ tyrannical hypocrisy:
On tips from Shawn, Wiggins, and SR. Hat tip: The Right Scoop.
So the basic thing is that a thing has no free speech rights? Therefore 1st amendment should not apply to corporations. Neither should taxes or lawsuits. After all it it has no voice, it must not be a thing.
If this amendment move gets anywhere near gaining traction, THEN it will become necessary…by any means necessary…to remove the existing government and replace it with one that will again abide by the Constitution.
AC may get his shooting war yet…and in this case, I’m right there with him.
Nancy Pelosi, dear…if you try this, we’ll try you, in a court…and please remember what the maximum penalty for treason is, babe.
Its time for Nancy to retire (go away). Would she prefer jail?
Time to cut to the chase.
HANG LIBERALS FROM THE NEAREST TREE!
I guess that ‘Congress shall make NO law’ thing is really a mental challenge for them.
Have head a whole lot about the taxpayer funded campaign support.
The United States Air Force has established two new aircraft squadrons to support President Obama’s travel needs during the campaign season.
The 305th and 306th Expeditionary Airlift Squadrons were activated as subordinate units of the 89th Airlift Wing on December 1.
The 305th will operate out of New Castle, DE, with 5 C-130H medium lift transport aircraft, 8 full sets of aircrew, 60 assigned maintenance personnel and 12 operations personnel.
The 306th will operate out of Andrews AFB, with 4 C-17 heavy lift transports, 7 full aircrew, 60 maintenance personnel, and 10 operations personnel will be assigned.
Operations for the two squadrons are to commence in April, and will run through the election. The aircraft and personnel will be released back to their original units after Nov. 2. Well, isn’t that nice of him?
NOTE: Considering his disdain for the military forces of America , this is truly incredible! And why doesn’t the Democratic National Committee pay for at least part of Obama’s campaign expenses? Furthermore, since
Obama has already accumulated countless millions of dollars to support his campaign, why doesn’t the SOB use those funds for campaign travels?
Ignore this or pass it on to others. My colleagues and I are taking action!
We’re passing this information to everyone we know, and we plan to file complaints with the news media and every proper member of Congress!
Regardless of your political affiliation or personal opinions, this man has no right to have ALL American taxpayers pay for his campaign expenses!
This is factual. Read it yourself:
http://www.dcmilitary.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20111209/NEWS09/712099912/89th-activates-2-eas-squadrons&template=PrinterFriendly
I guess bathouse barry is exempt from this one!
http://www.btlaw.com/files/CarriageElectedOfficials.pdf
“Specific FEC regulations apply to travel on a government-owned aircraft, including aircraft owned federally, as well as those owned by states or local governments. This regulation requires that the
campaign traveler or his political committee reimburse the governmental entity in a manner similar to that for reimbursement of travel on a privately owned aircraft”
When will this hag and her husband be indicted and sent to jail?
Why are we surprised? These Mensa-rejects have failed to notice “shall not be infringed” in the next Amendment in that list.
Next we’ll find in the emenations and penumbras the ex post facto laws and bills of attainder do not apply to the Koch Brothers.
The Honest Leadership and Open Government Act of 2007 significantly changed the law with respect to the carriage of candidates for election and other campaign travelers on non-commercial aircraft. In order to fully implement these changes, the Federal Election Commission (FEC) promulgated new rules governing the carriage of federal candidates on private aircraft during election campaigns.
The new rules apply to any individual traveling in connection with an election for Federal office. It is important to note that the FEC rules only apply to candidates seeking Federal office. The FEC definition of a candidate is rather broad so many currently elected federal officials would meet the definition and be subject to the new rules.
http://www.nbaa.org/admin/policies/carriage/
I don’t want a shooting war and have never wanted a shooting war. You’re out of your mind.
We have one last chance to end this. By ballots or bullets, they must be thrown out of office. Our future depends on it.
Really AC? Back-peddling now? What is all the talk of ammo and guns? (By the way, I also have ammo and guns and am in full support of the 2nd amendment.)
You have besmirched anyone that isn’t up to your purity test, you always talk about “being prepared”, you endlessly post about how it’s all going to come crashing down, you advise everyone to get guns and food…yet you aren’t pushing for an armed revolution?
Right.
Again, in this case, I’m with angryK9. If they go after the FIRST GODDAMN AMENDMENT, then there is no other choice. Ballots first, but in any case…
Why is anyone surprised? We are dealing with people who can’t handle real opposition. We are dealing with truly weak minded people. Vote them out. Send them home. And then change all tax laws and government budgets to make sure they have to work for a living instead of hand-outs. This will neuter them politically.
Wyatt’s Torch? What the hell is that? That should read SeaFoamGreen.
I looked up Wyatt’s Torch. That isn’t me, but someone who posted here. I have my handle typed into the “name” field, so how did that happen?
This really bugs me. Can I be “hacked” somehow? Anyone?
…and now my name is coming up as normal. WHAT WAS THAT???
busted
Would they then have a constitutional convention? And if they called a constitutional convention where would that lead?
Using that logic, only people considering suicide would buy life insurance.
I use my Second Amendment rights to buy goblin insurance.
I also enjoy collecting and shooting guns, issues of safety and security aside.
Purity test? I call it common sense and constitutionalism.
Core beliefs are non-negotiable. If you’re willing to negotiate on something, like Boehner did with the deficit spending or Romney with the Second Amendment, then you don’t truly believe in it.
What’s coming down the pike is a matter of hard reality. As Clint Eastwood says, “Deserve’s got nothing to do with it.” We don’t deserve troubled times nor do we want them, but because of poor political decisions, they will become reality over our objections.
Moonbats believe the world runs according to their feelings.
I see the writing on the wall. It makes me sick to watch, and I don’t want this path to continue, but I recognize the near inevitability of it given the current mass ignorance and political dysfunction gripping the nation.
I have taken responsibility towards self-reliance. You sneer at preparedness. You know where that attitude gets you? A government food line.
If I’m wrong and you’re right, nothing changes for me.
If I’m right and you’re wrong, your way of life and comfort factor will come to a screeching halt.
Savor the good times while they last. The deficit spending isn’t going to stop, nor will the job loss, malinvestment, or money printing.
Busted. Wyatt quit posting here months before SeaFoamGreen started.
Tell Wyatt to come back. He was a reasonable and solid conservative.
And one more thing – how does a person whose old handle referenced a man who contributed to letting moonbattery collapse in on itself get the nerve to tell others they should vote for the moonbat-lite candidate who will supposedly save the system from collapsing under its own weight?
I am not a Democrat and I am no longer a Republican. Both parties are content with the business as usual path of growing government, adding debt, and corroding the economy.
I have no idea how that name came up, as (a) that ain’t me and (b) it wasn’t in my “Name (required)” box. Something ain’t right here, and I’m going to get a techie friend to find out who is messing with me.
As to your point…what IS your point? Because I don’t agree with you, I can’t support someone who will (at least) give us a chance to reclaim this country?
One thing I will agree with: you ain’t a Republican, Democrat or conservative. You’re a guy with an agenda that does not have America’s interest at heart, no matter how hard you try to convince others that it is.
Nobody is messing with you. You clicked on the wrong autocomplete entry. The name “Wyatt’s Torch” wouldn’t be in your system otherwise.
Balancing the budget and getting the economy back on track is not in America’s best interest?
Lay off the Krugman.
Why do they always do things so half-assed!? Why don’t they just TRY to pass a law that you can only vote for Goose-stepping Commie DemocRATS? Guess it’s that ole thing about not being able to tell the TRUTH and they’re too pussy to actually say what they really want.
This is long, but I’m putting it here… short version is that Congress or the Prez can NOT make a law amending the Constitution… no way, no how…
The Amendment Process:
There are essentially two ways spelled out in the Constitution for how to propose an amendment. One has never been used.
The first method is for a bill to pass both houses of the legislature, by a two-thirds majority in each. Once the bill has passed both houses, it goes on to the states. This is the route taken by all current amendments. Because of some long outstanding amendments, such as the 27th, Congress will normally put a time limit (typically seven years) for the bill to be approved as an amendment (for example, see the 21st and 22nd).
The second method prescribed is for a Constitutional Convention to be called by two-thirds of the legislatures of the States, and for that Convention to propose one or more amendments. These amendments are then sent to the states to be approved by three-fourths of the legislatures or conventions. This route has never been taken, and there is discussion in political science circles about just how such a convention would be convened, and what kind of changes it would bring about.
Regardless of which of the two proposal routes is taken, the amendment must be ratified, or approved, by three-fourths of states. There are two ways to do this, too. The text of the amendment may specify whether the bill must be passed by the state legislatures or by a state convention. See the Ratification Convention Page for a discussion of the make up of a convention. Amendments are sent to the legislatures of the states by default. Only one amendment, the 21st, specified a convention. In any case, passage by the legislature or convention is by simple majority.
The Constitution, then, spells out four paths for an amendment:
Proposal by convention of states, ratification by state conventions (never used)
Proposal by convention of states, ratification by state legislatures (never used)
Proposal by Congress, ratification by state conventions (used once)
Proposal by Congress, ratification by state legislatures (used all other times)
It is interesting to note that at no point does the President have a role in the formal amendment process (though he would be free to make his opinion known). He cannot veto an amendment proposal, nor a ratification. This point is clear in Article 5, and was reaffirmed by the Supreme Court in Hollingsworth v Virginia (3 US 378 [1798]):
What queen Botox is showing us is that she, and her fellow Leftist Demoncrats, have absolutely zero respect for the American people. The Left believes the people are so incredibly weak and stupid that they can’t see what is being done to our country, or, that they lack the will to do anything about it…. Are they right?
A corporation is a collection of individuals, just as a union is a collection of individuals. They have different goals, but are fundamentally similar.
Sam Adams, I never understood why one is different from the other either. Moreover, corporations pay taxes and should have every right to express their voice just like anyone else.
These chumps can’t even pass a budget. What in the world persuades them that they can push through an amendment to the Constitution?
It is as with everything from the Democrats these days
Hit the send button by mistake…
Empty symbolism in a pathetic attempt to excite their base.
They’re in deep shit and they know it.
Do what you will, Nancy. Ain’t nothing gonna keep you from burning forever.
[...] The Founding Father valued freedom of speech so highly that they placed it even before the right to bear arms in the Bill of Rights. Obviously their main concern was not the right to distribute pornography or to shout obscenities on street corners, but political speech — which is precisely what Democrats want to amend the Constitution to suppress. The whole story is here http://moonbattery.com/?p=10814 [...]
If corporations are not people…would’nt that apply to labor unions too.
I want to get this in Before they Pass the Law,Hey Nancy EAT A DICK!