Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 52
  1. #16
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    13,453
    Blog Entries
    5

    Re: Not a joke: Democrats to try to limit free speech by amending the Constitution



    Quote Originally Posted by Dade View Post
    Don't Republicans take away our freedoms as well...Patriotic Act.
    Just Osama Bin Laden's when they killed him and your guy odered the
    hit. He finally did something good.

    And don't forget your Nazi Pelosi's attack on the 1st amendment.
    All this was called out in advance.


    http://www.prisonplanet.com/nancy-pe...k-on-the-first... Cached
    Related posts: Nancy Pelosi Wants to Amend the First Amendment; Obama Plans Attack On First Amendment if Re-elected; Democrats Push for Constitutional ...
    Last edited by AirFlacco; 05-27-2014 at 12:33 AM.




  2. #17

    Re: Not a joke: Democrats to try to limit free speech by amending the Constitution

    Quote Originally Posted by Dade View Post
    Don't Republicans take away our freedoms as well...Patriotic Act.
    No, not really. If you'll look up the Patriot Act, what it does at the core is gives law enforcement broader surveillance capabilities. That much isn't in doubt. However, they still must obtain a search warrant. Title V of the Patriot Act does allow and strengthen NSLs (National Security Letters). If a person is already under investigation, then a warrant does not need to be obtained under Title V.

    The Constitution of the United States of America was not affected in anyway by the Patriot Act. No freedoms were taken.
    "A moron, a rapist, and a Pittsburgh Steeler walk into a bar. He sits down and says, Hi Im Ben may I have a drink please?
    ProFootballMock




  3. #18
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Houston, TX Y'all
    Posts
    27,510

    Re: Not a joke: Democrats to try to limit free speech by amending the Constitution

    Quote Originally Posted by darb72 View Post
    I'm as libertarian as you are, and this sends chills down my spine.

    We've known for a while that democrats want to strip away personal freedoms. This is just the most openly they've gone about it. No, there is no chance of this amendment passing, but the fact they even bring it up shows just how far they are willing to go to force their ideas on everybody else.
    What Dade said.

    They can see the Senate make up just as easily as you and I. They knew they didn't have the numbers when the bill was introduced.

    Nothing more than a rally cry.
    WARNING: This post may contain material offensive to those who lack wit, humor, common sense and/or supporting factual or anecdotal evidence. All statements and assertions contained herein may be subject to literary devices not limited to: irony, metaphor, allusion and dripping sarcasm.




  4. #19
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Houston, TX Y'all
    Posts
    27,510

    Re: Not a joke: Democrats to try to limit free speech by amending the Constitution

    Quote Originally Posted by Haloti92 View Post
    There is only one side a true libertarian could possibly support here, so I am not sure what you mean about "party dogma."
    I'd think Libertarians would expect their law makers to follow the letter of the Constitution and not rely on the courts.

    Since this isn't a free speech issue (in spite of the dogma from the GOP declaring it such) and more of campaign finance limits, I'd assume Libertarians like me are fine that lawmakers are at least following the Constitution and attempting (though it's a fools errand) to use the amendment process and not judicial fiat.
    WARNING: This post may contain material offensive to those who lack wit, humor, common sense and/or supporting factual or anecdotal evidence. All statements and assertions contained herein may be subject to literary devices not limited to: irony, metaphor, allusion and dripping sarcasm.




  5. #20
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Houston, TX Y'all
    Posts
    27,510

    Re: Not a joke: Democrats to try to limit free speech by amending the Constitution

    Quote Originally Posted by darb72 View Post
    No, not really. If you'll look up the Patriot Act, what it does at the core is gives law enforcement broader surveillance capabilities. That much isn't in doubt. However, they still must obtain a search warrant. Title V of the Patriot Act does allow and strengthen NSLs (National Security Letters). If a person is already under investigation, then a warrant does not need to be obtained under Title V.

    The Constitution of the United States of America was not affected in anyway by the Patriot Act. No freedoms were taken.
    Bull to the shit.

    There's a slew of warrentless searches that were forbidden that are now "legal" under the Act. Already being under investigation has nothing to do with some of the warrentless searches either.
    WARNING: This post may contain material offensive to those who lack wit, humor, common sense and/or supporting factual or anecdotal evidence. All statements and assertions contained herein may be subject to literary devices not limited to: irony, metaphor, allusion and dripping sarcasm.




  6. #21
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Clayton,NC
    Posts
    7,742

    Re: Not a joke: Democrats to try to limit free speech by amending the Constitution

    Quote Originally Posted by Dade View Post
    The article was decent enough. I will agree there are always unintended consequences with any legislation. What about the unintended consequences of Citizens United and McCutcheon. It doesn't sit well with me that people can spend millions of dollars to influence elections/politicians, be they GOP or Democrat. Most of us don't have those type of resources. IMO it unfairly gives more power to those with the means and money. Their "free speech" is greater than ours. This proposal seeks to limit that.
    At the end of the day, I don't think the amount of money spent really matters. At least not in the bigger elections.
    We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid. - Benjamin Franklin




  7. #22
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Stuttgart, Germany
    Posts
    8,266

    Re: Not a joke: Democrats to try to limit free speech by amending the Constitution

    Quote Originally Posted by HoustonRaven View Post
    I'd think Libertarians would expect their law makers to follow the letter of the Constitution and not rely on the courts.

    Since this isn't a free speech issue (in spite of the dogma from the GOP declaring it such) and more of campaign finance limits, I'd assume Libertarians like me are fine that lawmakers are at least following the Constitution and attempting (though it's a fools errand) to use the amendment process and not judicial fiat.
    +1




  8. #23
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Stuttgart, Germany
    Posts
    8,266

    Re: Not a joke: Democrats to try to limit free speech by amending the Constitution

    Quote Originally Posted by NCRAVEN View Post
    At the end of the day, I don't think the amount of money spent really matters. At least not in the bigger elections.
    Maybe, maybe not. In the smaller state and local elections I think it most definitely matters and makes a difference. But the larger National elections (i.e. President)...IDK. Regardless, it does give the perception of something shady going on. I don't like that corporations give so much money to a politician, that politician in turn passes favorable legislation for that company, and when they leave office becomes an executive in that company. It's a process that has been going on for decades for both the GOP and Democrats. How and when is our voice going to be heard in that circle? It needs to change.




  9. #24
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Clayton,NC
    Posts
    7,742

    Re: Not a joke: Democrats to try to limit free speech by amending the Constitution

    Quote Originally Posted by Dade View Post
    Maybe, maybe not. In the smaller state and local elections I think it most definitely matters and makes a difference. But the larger National elections (i.e. President)...IDK. Regardless, it does give the perception of something shady going on. I don't like that corporations give so much money to a politician, that politician in turn passes favorable legislation for that company, and when they leave office becomes an executive in that company. It's a process that has been going on for decades for both the GOP and Democrats.
    I don't disagree at all.
    Quote Originally Posted by Dade View Post
    How and when is our voice going to be heard in that circle? It needs to change.
    However, I don't see how this would change anything. Changing limitations on campaigns isn't going to stop the backroom deals that make guys like Harry Reid a millionaire yet has never had a real job.
    We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid. - Benjamin Franklin




  10. #25

    Re: Not a joke: Democrats to try to limit free speech by amending the Constitution

    Quote Originally Posted by HoustonRaven View Post
    I'd think Libertarians would expect their law makers to follow the letter of the Constitution and not rely on the courts.
    I am not sure who is advocating otherwise in this case.

    Quote Originally Posted by HoustonRaven View Post
    Since this isn't a free speech issue (in spite of the dogma from the GOP declaring it such) and more of campaign finance limits, I'd assume Libertarians like me are fine that lawmakers are at least following the Constitution and attempting (though it's a fools errand) to use the amendment process and not judicial fiat.
    No one is objecting to the process of proposing amendments to the Constitution. They are objecting to the specific amendment proposal, and for good reason.

    And it absolutely is a free speech issue. If the government claims for itself the authority to restrict spending on speech, then it is claiming the authority to restrict speech. The idea that "too much" free speech is dangerous is a tough one to defend, yet that is somehow what many people seem to reflexively imply.




  11. #26
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Houston, TX Y'all
    Posts
    27,510

    Re: Not a joke: Democrats to try to limit free speech by amending the Constitution

    Quote Originally Posted by Haloti92 View Post
    I am not sure who is advocating otherwise in this case.
    Quote Originally Posted by Haloti92 View Post
    No one is objecting to the process of proposing amendments to the Constitution. They are objecting to the specific amendment proposal, and for good reason.
    I wasn't advocating anything. Rather, I was responding to your comment about how Libertarians view this issue.

    Quote Originally Posted by Haloti92 View Post
    And it absolutely is a free speech issue. If the government claims for itself the authority to restrict spending on speech, then it is claiming the authority to restrict speech. The idea that "too much" free speech is dangerous is a tough one to defend, yet that is somehow what many people seem to reflexively imply.
    That's quite a stretch and speaks to the party dogma I mentioned earlier. Considering that the Bill of Rights protects individual rights, not corporate rights, I fail to see any slippery slope you seem to suggest here. I don't agree with SCOTUS when they ruled a cooperation has the same rights as an individual. In fact, IIRC, the court in their ruling said this type of focused legislation was the way to go instead of using the courts as the tool to reign in corporate donations.

    That said, this legislations doesn't touch an individuals ability to send money to a PAC, Special Interest Group, etc. It restricts the amount of money a corporation may contribute to a campaign. Since the word "corporation" doesn't appear in the Constitution, I don't see where they have any "right" to give unfettered amounts to any campaign they see fit.

    As long as you and I are free to give to the above groups (or directly to a campaign), this doesn't effect an individuals right to free speech one iota.
    WARNING: This post may contain material offensive to those who lack wit, humor, common sense and/or supporting factual or anecdotal evidence. All statements and assertions contained herein may be subject to literary devices not limited to: irony, metaphor, allusion and dripping sarcasm.




  12. #27
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Clayton,NC
    Posts
    7,742

    Re: Not a joke: Democrats to try to limit free speech by amending the Constitution

    Quote Originally Posted by HoustonRaven View Post
    I wasn't advocating anything. Rather, I was responding to your comment about how Libertarians view this issue.



    That's quite a stretch and speaks to the party dogma I mentioned earlier. Considering that the Bill of Rights protects individual rights, not corporate rights, I fail to see any slippery slope you seem to suggest here. I don't agree with SCOTUS when they ruled a cooperation has the same rights as an individual. In fact, IIRC, the court in their ruling said this type of focused legislation was the way to go instead of using the courts as the tool to reign in corporate donations.

    That said, this legislations doesn't touch an individuals ability to send money to a PAC, Special Interest Group, etc. It restricts the amount of money a corporation may contribute to a campaign. Since the word "corporation" doesn't appear in the Constitution, I don't see where they have any "right" to give unfettered amounts to any campaign they see fit.

    As long as you and I are free to give to the above groups (or directly to a campaign), this doesn't effect an individuals right to free speech one iota.
    The slippery slope for me would be if they went the route of amending the constitution and then have some SCOTUS judges misinterpret what it meant, much like with ACA.
    We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid. - Benjamin Franklin




  13. #28
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Houston, TX Y'all
    Posts
    27,510

    Re: Not a joke: Democrats to try to limit free speech by amending the Constitution

    Quote Originally Posted by NCRAVEN View Post
    The slippery slope for me would be if they went the route of amending the constitution and then have some SCOTUS judges misinterpret what it meant, much like with ACA.
    Still quite a stretch, given the make up of Congress.

    And the courts cannot invalidate a Constitutional amendment unless it contradicts another part of the Constitution. Since this is a proposed amendment and not a bill, the courts have very little say.
    WARNING: This post may contain material offensive to those who lack wit, humor, common sense and/or supporting factual or anecdotal evidence. All statements and assertions contained herein may be subject to literary devices not limited to: irony, metaphor, allusion and dripping sarcasm.




  14. #29
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Clayton,NC
    Posts
    7,742

    Re: Not a joke: Democrats to try to limit free speech by amending the Constitution

    Quote Originally Posted by HoustonRaven View Post
    Still quite a stretch, given the make up of Congress.

    And the courts cannot invalidate a Constitutional amendment unless it contradicts another part of the Constitution. Since this is a proposed amendment and not a bill, the courts have very little say.
    I don't think we're talking about the same thing. I'm not saying SCOTUS has any power over the law. I'm talking about how ACA was passed and then they tried to say it was under the commerce clause, ultimately finding it a tax. My concern would be that somewhere down the road IF this were passed, that something similar in regards to free speech would happen and SCOUTS would agree.

    Hard to say what all that may be or even if/when. But that would be my concern.
    We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid. - Benjamin Franklin




  15. #30
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Houston, TX Y'all
    Posts
    27,510

    Re: Not a joke: Democrats to try to limit free speech by amending the Constitution

    Quote Originally Posted by NCRAVEN View Post
    I don't think we're talking about the same thing. I'm not saying SCOTUS has any power over the law. I'm talking about how ACA was passed and then they tried to say it was under the commerce clause, ultimately finding it a tax. My concern would be that somewhere down the road IF this were passed, that something similar in regards to free speech would happen and SCOUTS would agree.

    Hard to say what all that may be or even if/when. But that would be my concern.
    You're not understanding the Amendment process.

    Amendment's that are ratified do not go through SCOTUS scrutiny, thus there won't be an ACA moment where the court calls it something it isn't. That only happens on statute or legislation passed by Congress. There's no slipping down a slope because there's no slope.

    Once an amendment is ratified, that's it. Its in the Constitution and, by definition, constitutional.
    WARNING: This post may contain material offensive to those who lack wit, humor, common sense and/or supporting factual or anecdotal evidence. All statements and assertions contained herein may be subject to literary devices not limited to: irony, metaphor, allusion and dripping sarcasm.




Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Russell Street Report Website Design by D3Corp Ocean City Maryland