Tea Party Patriots Ordinary citizens reclaiming America's founding principles.
Showing posts with label Free Speech. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Free Speech. Show all posts

Monday, September 17, 2018

Constitution Day and Citizenship Day


image credit: lauruscollege.edu

Today is Constitution Day and Citizenship Day, and “the act mandates that all publicly funded educational institutions, and all federal agencies, provide educational programming on the history of the American Constitution on that day.” Er, one day out of the year? Nevertheless, Salena Zito reports some encouraging news:

"We must not be afraid to be free," Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black famously said in a dissent defending free expression. That appeal is germane today, especially on college campuses, professor Daniel Cullen argues.

Cullen, a professor of political science at Rhodes College, is working to engage liberal arts college students on the critical importance of the First Amendment and free speech. It's part of a program at 30 colleges and universities across the country [which] will be marking Constitution Day on September 17, the 231st anniversary of its signing.

“It is a critical moment in American society and culture to deeply reflect First Amendment traditions as they relate to the Constitution,” said Cullen of the initiative sponsored by the Jack Miller Center.
. . .
“There was a survey recently done by the Knight Foundation that found a majority of American college students today either believe incorrectly that the First Amendment prohibits hate speech, or if it doesn't, then it ought to,” he says.

Simply put, it is an entire generation forgetting that one of the proudest achievements of American democracy is that we agree to tolerate the speech we hate.

“Nevertheless it's that proposition that a majority of college students no longer accept. They don't think it's something to be proud of. They think it's an error so the question is, ‘Why?’ And I think the best answer is that they, especially the iGen generation have become highly sensitized to the harm that speech can do and the offensiveness that often goes along with speech,” he said.
. . .
Yet Cullen remains hopeful, “What we do is we try and separate truth from falsehood and truth from error, and students remain naturally intellectually curious. They want to hear the arguments for important moral viewpoints, even arguments for viewpoints that strike them as fundamentally wrong.”

Read the rest here.
# # #


Sunday, April 30, 2017

The lies we were told about who would silence free speech


art credit: National Coalition Against Censorship

John Kass at The Chicago Tribune comments on the liberal reaction to conservative speech, which is, essentially: “Shut Up.”
The lie we were told as kids was this: The end of American liberty would come at the hands of the political right.
Conservatives would take away our right to speak our minds, and use the power of government to silence dissent. The right would intimidate our teachers and professors, and coerce the young.
And then, with the universities in thrall, with control of the apparatus of the state (and the education bureaucracy), the right would have dominion over a once-free people.
. . .
But the lie is obvious now, isn't it?
Because it is not conservatives who coerced today's young people or made them afraid of ideas that challenge them. Conservatives did not shame people into silence, or send thugs out on college campuses to beat down those who wanted to speak.
The left did all that.
It's there in front of you, the thuggish mobs of the left killing free speech at American universities. The thugs call themselves antifas, for anti-fascists.
They beat people up and break things and set fires and intimidate. These are not anti-fascists. These are fascists. This is what fascists do.
. . .
What is the cost for all this?
Free speech, without which there is no republic.
American universities were once thought to be the last great refuge of ideas, where ideas could flourish and be challenged and debated. But today, the university is the place where liberty and ideas go to die.
. . .
Right-wing provocateur Ann Coulter has been silenced at Berkeley, where the free speech movement was born. And other intellectuals, including Charles Murray and Heather Mac Donald, have been silenced at other colleges, attacked by mobs.
If the left agrees with your views, you may speak. If the left doesn't agree, they will shut you down. This is America now.
. . .
University administrators have made a show of wringing their hands. But they're hypocrites. They're part of this. They are of the same cloth. They allowed this seed to bloom. They watered it, by giving in to the young who demanded a safe space from intellectual challenge.
Safe spaces are not about learning or critical thinking. Safe spaces belong to education camps, where future bureaucrats are trained in the Orwellian shaping of language and the culling of threatening ideas.
. . .
All speech challenging the status quo is offensive — to the establishment. And free speech is what American liberty is about.
Unless, of course, you're of the hard left, and can hunt free speech at American universities and crush it.
That's not fiction. That's not fantasy. And it is not a lie. It's happening now, in the United States.
Read the rest here.

# # #




Thursday, September 29, 2016

Obama's illegal Internet giveaway


photo credit: wnd.com

State AGs sue to stop Obama's internet transition

  

Four Republican state Attorneys General [Mike DeWine is not one of them] are suing to stop the Obama administration from transferring oversight of the internet to an international body, arguing the transition would violate the U.S. Constitution.

The lawsuit — filed Wednesday in a Texas federal court — threatens to throw up a new roadblock to one of the White House’s top tech priorities, just days before the scheduled Oct. 1 transfer of the internet’s address system is set to take place.

In their lawsuit, the attorneys general for Arizona, Oklahoma, Nevada and Texas contend that the transition, lacking congressional approval, amounts to an illegal giveaway of U.S. government property. They also express fear that the proposed new steward of the system, a nonprofit known as ICANN, would be so unchecked that it could “effectively enable or prohibit speech on the Internet.”

The four states further contend that ICANN could revoke the U.S. government’s exclusive use of .gov and .mil, the domains used by states, federal agencies and the U.S. military for their websites. And the four attorneys general argue that ICANN’s “current practices often foster a lack of transparency that, in turn, allows illegal activity to occur.”

“Trusting authoritarian regimes to ensure the continued freedom of the internet is lunacy,” said Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton in a statement. “The president does not have the authority to simply give away America’s pioneering role in ensuring that the internet remains a place where free expression can flourish.”

Read the rest here. Ohio AG Mike DeWine’s website is here
# # #

Friday, April 1, 2016

Politics, free speech, and rent-a-mobs

art credit: www.blazingcatfur.ca

After the Trump rally was cancelled in Chicago a few weeks ago, Tiffany Gabbay reported at Truth Revolt

. . . The greater issue here is the psychosis currently gripping media, celebrity, and even fellow conservatives when it comes to the topic of Donald Trump.

This is dangerous ground on which to tread and reminds me of the knee-jerk reactions leftists had in crying "Racist!" anytime a person opposed Barack Obama on the basis of substance. So now Trump can be smeared as Hitler in much the same way, and anyone who supports him can be shamed as a person who "would have helped Hitler carry out the Holocaust." 

And this is part of what led to the riotous protests at the Trump rally in Chicago.

Does Donald Trump bear responsibility for the way he carries himself? Yes. But the media, along with the #NeverTrump crowd, conveniently leave out context and incite even more animus than was there to begin with. 

During several Trump rallies, aggressive -- not peaceful -- protesters have showed up to heckle Trump, his supporters, and attempted to disrupt these gatherings. Trump was reacting not to peaceful protesters, but to rabble rousers. Were some of the things he said in response to these agitators presidential? Perhaps not. But context in reporting and refraining from comparing Trump to Hitler on every news broadcast and print article would have been essential to quelling the rising tensions.

The truth is that those who protested Trump in Chicago are the same kind of people who needed no provocation at all to riot in Ferguson and in Baltimore and just about every other time and place in which they've tried to shut down free speech with aggression and militancy. This is the real fascism on display, not Trump. 

Conservatives, including other GOP candidates, who dislike Trump and wish to distance themselves from his rhetoric should think twice before embarking on the slippery slope of blaming Trump for the thuggery that occurred in Chicago on Friday. They should also look to their role in fanning the flames with every Trump-Hitler reference they make. This is not a road we want to go down. And if we do, there might not be a way of turning back. 

Think again about the violent protesting that resulted in Trump cancelling his March 11 rally in Chicago. One Twitter message reads:

Protesters celebrate chanting "We stopped Trump."

These protesters are not protesting just Trump, they are protesting free speech. And some of them, who knows how many, are bought and paid for.  Here is one of the ads in Craig’s List, posted on March 8 showing the hiring of the rent-a-mob protesters. Other reports on rent-a-mobs are here and here

Notice that one of the states listed at the end of the ad is Ohio. Hmm. Mid-July. Cleveland. Republican National Convention.

Fasten your safety belts. It’s going to be a bumpy ride.

# # #



Friday, December 5, 2014

Left’s latest assault on free speech


Art credit: rslblog.com


Left’s latest assault on First Amendment nothing new

By Jenny Beth Martin

During the last week of October, when media attention was focused on the impending midterm elections – and President Obama’s forthcoming executive action on amnesty – an issue of critical importance slipped almost unnoticed into the news cycle. Democrats on the Federal Election Commission (FEC) are getting serious about stifling free speech on the Internet. 
At issue is an obscure anti-Obama ad from Ohio that wound up on YouTube. Because the spot was placed for free, it fell within the “Internet exception” the FEC has recognized – across party lines – since 2006. Internet ads of a political nature would seem the very embodiment of “free speech” contemplated by the Founders in the Bill of Rights. Democrat members of the FEC – and the American Left in general – see criticism of their Dear Leader as a serious matter, however, and in need of government regulation. They’re going to need to see your papers. 
The Obama Machine, whether in campaign or governing mode (is there really any difference?) has long viewed the First Amendment as an impediment to its agenda of “fundamentally transforming” the country. During the 2008 campaign, Democrat prosecutors in Missouriannounced the deployment of truth squads to “immediately respond” (in an ominous, yet unspecified way) to any derogatory information about then-Senator Obama. They backed down after being called out for their “police state” tactics by the then-governor. 
Once elected, the post-partisan president let it be known he’d brook no second guessing, let alone dissent. In 2009, vocal critics of the healthcare takeover could’ve found themselves on the flag@whitehouse enemies list, had they spread information deemed “fishy” by the administration.  After Robert Gibbs’ feeble insistence that of course the White House wasn’t keeping names and email addresses, the site was dismantled. 
Obama uses the bully pulpit to let his subjects know what a danger the First Amendment poses to his post-partisan agenda, and the 2010 State of the Union address was an ideal setting. Displeased with the recent Citizens United ruling, he took the unprecedented step of rebuking Supreme Court justices as they sat on the front row. Separation of powers and even basic rules of courtesy and decorum take a back seat, when the Cult of Personality needs to see its enemies’ donor lists. 
Following his 2010 mid-term “shellacking,” (and while his IRS was systematically targeting his perceived enemies), President Obama stepped up his assault on dissenters. In an absurd, "middle school hall monitor meets police state" story, Attack Watch was born. Concerned supporters of the president everywhere were asked to monitor and report any and all derogatory information. Knowledge is power, especially when informing on your neighbors.  And again, they certainly kept no list of names…not the folks who ask folks to document the content of group prayers. 
While it’s comforting that Attack Watch died relatively quickly (and mostly from ridicule), the sentiment behind the buffoonery is both serious and scary. The Left views criticism of their president as dangerous; the Bill of Rights is secondary. 
Democrat FEC Vice Chairman Ann Ravel is unambiguous about both the perceived threat to her president and the way to combat it. When her attempt to overturn the 2006 “Internet exception” ruling failed on a 3-3 party line vote,  Ravel took serious offense. Because the FEC wouldn’t force free Internet advertising into the same classification as paid ads on radio or television, she needs to shake things up. “A reexamination of the commission’s approach to the Internet and other emerging technologies is long overdue,” she said, as if regulating political speech is the logical next step. 
This is not Ravel’s first attempt to wipe her feet on the Bill of Rights.  Two years ago in California, she attempted to bring bloggers and "online commentators" under state regulation. Unbowed by her failure at the state level, she now wants to take her speech-stifling act national. If Ravel and her Democrat FEC colleagues have their way, bloggers and websites like The Drudge Report will answer to the federal government. Attack Watch was silly; these proposed new regulations are deadly serious. 
Ultimately for the Left generally and for Obama in particular, this is about control. Their nationalization of the health care system was a means to get the government more involved in people’s individual lives. Things that get in the way of that control – like the Constitution – are mere impediments to be dealt with. The President shredded Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution so he could control immigration. 
Does anyone think he sees the First Amendment as an obstacle to his controlling the Internet? 
People are criticizing him, after all. 

Martin is co-founder of Tea Party Patriots.
# # #

Friday, January 20, 2012

SOPA & PIPA Only Delayed NOT STOPPED - Keep up the pressure!

 
Since our last Action Alert on SOPA (Stop Online Piracy Act) and its Senate cousin PIPA (PROTECT IP).there has been a lot that has happened and much more to be done to stop these bills.

On the same day that thousands of websites had gone dark to protest the Stop Online Piracy Act and Protect IP Act; Florida Senator Marco Rubio announced he was withdrawing his name and support for the House and Senate bills and it's been a domino affect every since.

Senators Jim Inhofe, John Cornyn, Orrin Hatch, John Boozman, David Vitter, Kelly Ayotte, and Roy Blunt have dropped their support and on the House side so did , former co-sponsors Representatives Ben Quayle, Lee Terry, Dennis Ross, Steve Scalise, Tim Griffin and Tim Holden.
 
SOPA is currently in the House Judiciary Committee, and just today House Judiciary Committee Chairman Lamar Smith (R-TX) said he will postpone consideration of his Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) until there is wider agreement on the controversial legislation.
 
On PIPA, with Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky) calls to shelve the bill, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has rescheduled a procedural vote on the legislation that was set for Tuesday afternoon.  Reid says he is confident some sort of compromise can be reached.
 
Trying to amend or fix SOPA & PIPA is like putting whip cream on crap - they might look more appealling, but underneath they are still crap and they must be flushed not fixed! SOPA & PIPA are not bills that can be amended into something acceptable, they must die completely.

What can you do?
 
Ohio has two Congressmen on the House Judiciary Committee, Congressman Steve Chabot (R-OH), a co-sponsor of SOPA and Congressman Jim Jordan (R-OH).

Please contact Congressman Chabot and ask him to withdraw as a co-sponsor of SOPA and to drop his support.

Congressman Steve Chabot
  

Contact Congressman Jim Jordan and ask him to defeat SOPA by any means necessary.
 
 Congressman Jim Jordan

Mansfield Office
Phone: (419) 522-5757
Fax: (419) 525-2805

Washington DC Office
DC PH#: 202-225-2676
DC Fax#: 202-226-0577
 

On PIPA contact Senate President Harry Reid and Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT) and ask them to once in their careers do the right thing and to STOP any and all discussions on PIPA.

Senate President Harry Reid
DC Phone: (202)224-3542
DC Fax: (202)224-7327
Email: http://reid.senate.gov/contact/index.cfm

Senator Patrick Leahy
DC Phone: (202)224-4242
Email: http://leahy.senate.gov/contact/

For a list of all the members on the Senate Judiciary Committee click here.

Friday, December 30, 2011

Obamacare for the Internet: Stop SOPA NOW!

Obamacare for the Internet!

SOPA (Stop Online Piracy Act) and its Senate cousin (PROTECT IP) are government solutions in search of a problem. Created under the false flag of piracy protection, this bill allows unelected bureaucrat US Attorney General (Eric Holder) to close down without due process, any site listed in a complaint. SOPA grants the federal government the right to restrict search engine results, freeze merchant accounts and force your internet provider to block any site branded in violation of SOPA. An unelected bureaucrat will decide which sites qualify.

What does this mean for you? Under SOPA, if a single complaint is filed against YouTube alleging pirated materiel, the entire website can be shut down while the claim is investigated. If a single complaint is registered against Google claiming they link to pirated materiel in search results, the entire site can be shut down during the investigation. If a single complaint is logged against Amazon.com claiming pirated goods are being sold, the entire site can be shut down and their online payment service frozen!

 Who thought this was a good idea? SOPA is sponsored by Representative Lamar Smith, A Republican from Texas who has been in Congress for over 25 years. His biggest campaign donors are from the TV/Movie industry, giving him over $50,000 a year for at least the past 10 years. SOPA also has 31 co-sponsors and is currently moving through the House Judiciary Committee (chaired by Lamar Smith). Outside Washington D.C., bloggers and experts across the political spectrum have warned against this legislation. SOPA is sponsored by a Republican, PROTECT IP is sponsored by a Democrat. It’s becoming clear that this battle is not about partisan politics or liberal vs. conservatives. This is the Washington elite, using overblown piracy fears to control our internet.

What can you do?
Contact your congressman and let them know SOPA (H.R. 3261) has no place in America. This is not a bill that can be amended into something acceptable, it must die completely.

Contact members of the Judiciary Committee specifically and urge them to defeat SOPA by any means necessary.

If you or someone you know lives in Wisconsin, North Carolina, California, Virginia, Ohio, Indiana, Florida, Arizona, Texas, Nevada, Iowa, Utah, Arkansas, Pennsylvania or South Carolina, please forward this alert to them. These states have congressional members on the Judiciary Committee, see below for the complete list.

Judiciary Committee

GOP Members

Lamar Smith (R-TX) [Chairman]
D.C. PH#: 202-225-4236
D.C. FX#: 202-225-8628
D.C. PH#: 202-225-5101
D.C. FX#: 202-225-3190
DC PH#: 202-225-3065
DC FX#: 202-225-8611
DC PH#: 202-225-5811
DC FX#: 202-225-1100
DC PH#: 202-225-5431
DC FX#: 202-225-9681 
DC PH#: 202-225-5716
DC FX#: 202-226-1298
DC PH#: 202-225-2216 
DC FX#: 202-225-3012
DC PH#: 202-225-3906 
DC FX: 202-225-3303
DC PH#: 202-225-3021
DC FX#: 202-225-3382 
DC PH#: 202-225-6365
DC FX#: 202-226-1170
DC PH#: 202-225-4426
DC FX#: 202-225-3193
DC PH#: 202-225-4576
DC FX#: 202-225-6328
DC PH#: 202-225-3035
DC FX#: 202-226-1230 
DC PH#: 202-225-2676
DC Fax#: 202-226-0577
DC PH#: 202-225-6565
DC FX#: 202-225-5547
DC PH#: 202-225-7751 
DC FX: 202-225-5629
DC PH#: 202-225-2506
DC FX#: 202-225-5903 
Email: https://griffin.house.gov/contact-me/email-me 

Tom Marino (R-PA) 
DC PH#: 202-225-3731
DC FX#: 202-225-9594
Email: https://marino.house.gov/contact-me/email-me 

Trey Gowdy (R-SC) 
DC PH#: 202-225-6030
DC FX#: 202-226-1177
Email: http://gowdy.house.gov/Contact/ 

Dennis Ross (R-FL) 
DC PH#: 202-225-1252 
DC FX#: 202-226-0585
Email: https://dennisross.house.gov/Contact/ 

Sandy Adams (R-FL) 
DC PH#: 202-225-2706
DC FX#: 202-226-6299
Email: http://adams.house.gov/Contact/ 

Ben Quayle (R-AZ)
DC PH#: 202-225-3361
DC FX#: 202-225-3462 
Email: http://quayle.house.gov/index.cfm?sectionid=58§io … 

Mark Amodei (R-NV) 
DC PH#: 202-225-6155
DC FX#: 202-225-5679
Email: https://amodei.house.gov/contact- 

Democrat Members

John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI) [Ranking Minority Member]
DC PH#: 202-225-5126
DC FX#: 202-225-0072
DC PH#: 202-225-4695 
DC FX#: 202-225-3196 
DC PH#: 202-225-5635
DC FX#: 202-225-6923
DC PH#: 202-225-8351
DC FX#: 202-225-8354
DC PH#: 202-225-1510
DC FX#: 202-225-1512
DC PH#: 202-225-3072
DC FX#: 202-225-3336
DC PH#: 202-225-3816
DC FX#: 202-225-3317
DC PH#: 202-225-2201
DC FX#: 202-225-7854
DC PH#: 202-225-3265
DC FX#: 202-225-5663
Email: https://cohenforms.house.gov/Forms/WriteYourRep/ 

Hank Johnson (D-GA)
DC PH#: 202-225-1605
DC FX#: 202-226-0691
Email: https://hankjohnsonforms.house.gov/contact-form.shtml 

Pedro Pierluisi (D-PR)
DC PH#: 202-225-2615
DC FX#: 202-225-2154
Email: http://pierluisi.house.gov/english/contact-us.html 

Mike Quigley (D-IL)
DC PH#: 202-225-4061
DC FX#: 202-225-5603
Email: https://forms.house.gov/quigley/contact-form.shtml 

Judy Chu (D-CA)
DC PH#: 202-225-5464
DC FX#: 202-225-5467
Email: https://forms.house.gov/chu/contact-form.shtml 

Ted Deutch (D-FL)
DC PH#: 202-225-3001
DC FX#: 202-225-5974
Email: https://deutchforms.house.gov/Forms/WriteYourRep/defa … 

Linda Sanchez (D-CA)
DC PH#: 202-225-6676
DC FX#: 202-226-1012
Email: https://forms.house.gov/lindasanchez/webforms/issue_s … 

Jared Polis (D-CO)
DC PH#: 202-225-2161
DC FX#: 202-226-7840
Email: https://polisforms.house.gov/Forms/WriteYourRep/defau …