FEC Chair Vows to Fight FEC Liberals Wanting to Regulate Conservative Media: Selective Enforcement

Share

Your ads will be inserted here by

Easy Plugin for AdSense.

Please go to the plugin admin page to
Paste your ad code OR
Suppress this ad slot.

Federal Elections Commission Chairman Lee Goodman said he believes there are “impulses in government every day,” (he specifically said “the left,)” to “look into the editorial decisions of conservative publishers.” Goodman is vowing to keep the media and internet free,” but his chairmanship expires in December 2014.

Graphic Free Speech 001

“The right has begun to break the left’s media monopoly, particularly through new media outlets like the internet, and I sense that some on the left are starting to rethink the breadth of the media exemption and internet communications,” he added.

Noting the success of sites like the Drudge Report, Goodman said that protecting conservative media, especially those on the internet, “matters to me because I see the future going to the democratization of media largely through the internet. They can compete with the big boys now, and I have seen storm clouds that the second you start to regulate them, there is at least the possibility or indeed proclivity for selective enforcement, so we need to keep the media free and the internet free.” ~ Lee Goodman via Washington Examiner

The article linked above shows a focus on The Drudge Report and Sean Hannity’s radio show:

“The picking and choosing has started to occur,” said Goodman. “There are some in this building that think we can actually regulate” media, added Goodman, a Republican whose chairmanship lasts through December. And if that occurs, he said, “then I am concerned about disparate treatment of conservative media.”

He added, “Truth be told, I want conservative media to have the same exemption as all other media.”

No where in this story is even a hint that Leftists on the FEC plan for Liberal, Progressive and Conservative media to be regulated in the same ways, or any recognition that government officials have zero right to suppress free speech of anyone. This is a strong warning to us that an assault on the First Amendment rights of conservatives is moving rapidly in concert with the IRS.

.

Share

Quoting Winston Churchill is now a Crime in the UK

Share

Your ads will be inserted here by

Easy Plugin for AdSense.

Please go to the plugin admin page to
Paste your ad code OR
Suppress this ad slot.

Paul Weston, the leader of the Liberty GB party in Great Britain was arrested this past weekend for, of all things publicly quoting one of his country’s greatest statesmen, Sir Winston Churchill.

Yes, you read that right. It would analogous to Sarah Palin being arrested in America for publicly quoting George Washington, or Abraham Lincoln.

But before we get to the “crime” of quoting Churchill, just exactly what is the Liberty GB party? Well, it has been favorably compared to the Tea Party movement here in the United States.

Liberty GB has been compared to the USA’s Tea Party, and in fact has many similarities with it.

Looking at the Tea Party’s “15 Non-negotiable Core Beliefs” reveals that, apart from the belief about Obama’s stimulus which is specifically American, 13 out of the remaining 14 – the exception is about gun ownership, on which our views vary – are very close to our own core beliefs.

The 15 open with: “Illegal immigrants are here illegally.” It may appear a truism, but there’s an important reason why tautologies like this need to be enunciated, namely that the Left nonsensically tries to deny them and their implications, in the UK as in the USA. You couldn’t find a party in Britain which would agree with that sentiment expressed by the Tea Party more than Liberty GB.

Our manifesto contains “Deport all illegal immigrants” and “Establish a National Border Police Force to tackle illegal entry and other cross-border crime.”

Several Tea Party’s core beliefs, like ours, stress the importance of economic issues and of balancing the respective countries’ budgets.

The two entities also share a common belief in lowering taxes and reigning in spending.

Several Tea Party’s core beliefs, like ours, stress the importance of economic issues and of balancing the respective countries’ budgets.

The Tea Party is internationally renowned for its strong anti-tax stance. Liberty GB has, among its manifesto policies, the implementation of two projects researched and devised by the UK’s TaxPayers’ Alliance (TPA): The Single Income Tax Report for the purpose of tax reduction and simplification, and Work for the Dole, similar to the Workfare enacted in America, to train and help people on out-of-work benefits back to work, thus reducing the size of the welfare state and the burden for taxpayers.

Your ads will be inserted here by

Easy Plugin for AdSense.

Please go to the plugin admin page to
Paste your ad code OR
Suppress this ad slot.

“Pro-domestic employment is indispensable.” is another Tea Party’s core belief. That is certainly not less true in Britain.

Read more on the similarities between the UK Liberty GB Party and the Tea Party movement in the US.
UK Liberty GB Party leader, Paul Weston being arrested Saturday, April 26
UK Liberty GB Party leader, Paul Weston being arrested Saturday, April 26

So now we can get back on point, which is the arrest of the Liberty GB Party’s leader, Paul Weston. On Saturday, the 26th, he was standing on a public street, NOT private property when he was using a megaphone to read from a part of Sir Winston Churchill’s literary works.

At around 2pm, Weston was addressing the passers-by on the street from the steps of Winchester Guildhall with a megaphone. He quoted the following passage about Islam from Churchill book, The River War:

“How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property – either as a child, a wife, or a concubine – must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men. Thousands become the brave and loyal soldiers of the faith: all know how to die but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith.”

Reportedly a woman, who found the passage “disgusting”, came out of the Guildhall and called the police.

Responding to her call, six or seven police officers arrived and questioned Weston for about 40 minutes.

At about 3pm, they arrested and searched him, and took him away in a police van.

paul weston quoting churchill  police surrounding paul weston

Read the full story here and here.

 

 

Share

Wilson High School School Bans Pro-life Posters, Allows Pro-Gay Posters, Claims Thomas More Society

Share

school_crossing_sign

You might have guessed it, a public school banned students from putting up Pro-Life posters.  But, pro-gay groups were allowed.  The Thomas More Center states that this seems to reflect a pattern of discrimination. Here is more from them…

Wilson High School Discriminates Against Pro-Life Student Group February 19th, 2014 by

Thomas More Society and Students for Life of America call on school administration to respect students’ constitutional rights

SFLA Logo

(February 19, 2014 – Tacoma, Washington) Wilson High School of Tacoma, WA, has received a letter from the Thomas More Society, a Chicago-based public interest law firm, demanding that the school end its discriminatory treatment of a pro-life student group. Wilson Students for Life (“WSFL”), an affiliate of Students for Life of America, was established in the Fall of 2013 by freshman Bryce Asberg to “loudly proclaim the pro-life message.”  Since its founding, the group has faced constant hostility from the school’s administration, such as forbidding the group to hang its posters or host certain events, while other student groups have faced no similar restrictions. The school has until February 25th to respond to Thomas More Society’s demand to end its hostility towards Wilson Students for Life, which discrimination violates the federal Equal Access Act.

“Public schools have a duty to treat all student groups equally,” said Peter Breen, Vice President and Senior Counsel of the Thomas More Society.  “Wilson High School’s current policy allows administrators to censor any messages they deem ‘offensive’—in this case, any pro-life message—while allowing other groups broad freedom of speech.  The administration is violating the rights of the students involved in Wilson Students for Life, who do not lose their constitutionally protected freedom of speech when they enter the schoolhouse door.”

Asberg’s group selected two posters from the Students for Life of America website to promote its club.  In compliance with school procedures, they asked the administration’s permission to hang these posters.  The first read “Since Roe v. Wade 1/3 of our generation has been aborted” with a picture of a milk carton and the word “missing” above the photo of a baby. The second poster quotes President Ronald Reagan: “I’ve noticed that everyone who is for abortion is already born.”

The administration refused to give WSFL permission to hang the posters.  The administration stated that the school policy only allows posters that “do not offend staff or students, put others down if they have a different belief/opinion, or otherwise cause disruption.”  WSFL’s posters, the administration maintained, would violate this policy because they promote a message rather than solely promoting the group’s meetings.

Despite this policy, however, the administration has permitted the Wilson Gay Straight Alliance (“GSA”) to hang flyers, for example, promoting homosexual relationships by showing conjoined male symbols and conjoined female symbols and stating “Love knows no limits.”

After the administration’s denial of WSFL’s posters, school administrators met with Asberg and the other WSFL leaders to “give them advice” on how to best run their club.  Asberg said he left the meeting feeling like his group was encouraged to only host events after school, while other groups were allowed to do what they wanted during the school day.  For example, while GSA is permitted to hold a Day of Silence during the school day, the pro-life club was discouraged from doing so as their identical event would be “too controversial.”

“The Wilson High School administration cannot be allowed to trample on the constitutional rights of Wilson Students for Life,” said Kristan Hawkins, President of Students for Life of America. “Our pro-life students will not accept their right to free speech being taken away. Sadly, this case shows that viewpoint discrimination is alive and well in today’s schools and that administrators think they can still get away with it.  Students for Life of America is proud to stand with Wilson Students for Life to demand that the Wilson High School administration reverse their unjust decision and give equal treatment to all students and student groups, regardless of their views on abortion.”

The federal Equal Access Act requires that schools give each student group the same opportunities, without discriminating against any group.  In 2002, the United States Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit held that a Washington school which gave one group access to its bulletin boards must give that access to all student groups.  Moreover, a number of Supreme Court decisions, such as Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Sch. Dist., have held that students’ speech cannot be silenced simply because the administration has vague fears of disruption.

“Wilson Students for Life is passionate about the pro-life movement,” stated Bryce Asberg, Founder of Wilson Students for Life, “and we will continue to stand for life in our community. We simply desire to be allowed to express our views.”

The letter from Thomas More Society to Wilson High School is available here.

Images of Students for Life of America pro-life posters, which Wilson Students for Life requested to hang at their school:

Are we really surprised?  This reminds of of the concept “Repressive Tolerance,” in which reality is essentially evil, and must be repressed, which evil is to be not only tolerated, but celebrated.

Here are the posters in question…

H/T: Christian News Wire, via Truth Revolt

Share

Will Fox Again be Targeted by the Obama Administration?

Share

govt-censorshipIf you recall, right after Obama was elected, the new administration declared the Fox News was not a news network, and sought to exclude them from anything in the new administration.  Of course, Fox covers stories that the rest of the networks refuse to cover.   That, and they refuse to lie for team Obama.  Given that history, and other, more recent events, and you’ll agree with Wyblog’s assessment of the situation…

Will the FCC shut down Fox News now that Obama has blamed them for all his problems?

It’s not without precedent.

Obama has gone out of his way to make sure that journalists keep their mouths shut about the shady actions and scandals that his administration has been involved in.

He threatened to destroy the career of a Fox News reporter exposing the truth about Benghazi. He’s using Soviet tactics to prosecute a filmmaker who made a movie exposing Obama’s radical background. He’s also been the most aggressive president since Nixon in keeping a tight grip on information. One former NSA official even came out and said that Obama’s tactics have made the US a police state.

And let’s not forget how he used the IRS to harass Conservatives.

Oh, wait, he told Bill O’Reilly he really didn’t do that. Honest.

And besides, all his problems are caused by Fox News. They’re spreading lies!. Lies and more lies! It’s all lies!

While speaking about Benghazi, Obama laughed at one point when O’Reilly asked about Susan Rice’s contention that the attack was a spontaneous action.

About two minutes later, Obama blamed Fox News for people believing Obama did not call the Benghazi attack terrorism.

“Your detractors believe that you did not tell the world it was a terror attack because your campaign didn’t want that out,” O’Reilly said.

“And they believe it because folks like you are telling them that,” Obama said.

“No, I’m not telling them that,” O’Reilly responded to laughter.

You know what I find most disconcerting? How he laughed at O’Reilly’s questions. Classy, that, isn’t it? Real Presidential.

When you look at any action of this administration, you have to keep in mind that controlling information is step one in any totalitarian state.  Eliminating Fox is a goal, especially when they outdraw both MSNBC and CNN combined.  And, what of all the Tea Party groups that have turned up over the last few years…

So I’m sure it’s just a coincidence that new IRS regulations will effectively put most conservative groups out of business, right before the 2014 midterm elections.

IRS Reg-134417-13 will forbid conservative groups from holding voter registration drives, advertising, promoting, and prohibits any kind of political activity including rallies, mailings, teas, and forums.

Meanwhile unions, a heavy Democrat-friendly constituency, are exempt from these new rules. I’m sure that’s just an oversight…

See, they completely make the charge of illegally targeting Conservatives go away by making it legal.

In a regressive world, run by regressives, only regressive ideas are to be discussed.  Any other ideas are to be banned, and the proponents of those ideas punished!

Share

Court Finds That Bloggers Have Same Rights as Journalists: Important Repercussions

Share

govt-censorshipProgressives, or as I like to call them, regressives, no matter of which party, hate the fact that new media is threatening their information monopoly.  Bloggers are among their chief targets. John Kerry notes a few months ago…

Steve, from America’s Watchtower, has more…

Yesterday at the U.S. Embassy in Brazil John Kerry said the following:

I’m a student of history, and I love to go back and read a particularly great book like [Henry] Kissinger’s book about diplomacy where you think about the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries and the balance of power and how difficult it was for countries to advance their interests and years and years of wars,” Kerry said to a gathering of State Department employees and their families.

“And we sometimes say to ourselves, boy, aren’t we lucky

  Okay, nothing wrong there, we are lucky to live in a world where it is much easier for countries to communicate with each other. But apparently the Secretary of State does not see it that way for he continued:

Well, folks,” he said, “ever since the end of the Cold War, forces have been unleashed that were tamped down for centuries by dictators, and that was complicated further by this little thing called the internet and the ability of people everywhere to communicate instantaneously and to have more information coming at them in one day than most people can process in months or a year.

“It makes it much harder to govern, makes it much harder to organize people, much harder to find the common interest. (emphasis added)

Just remember folks, you are too dumb to make your own decisions.  You should be like the low information voters that do what they are told.

We’ve broke so many stories, and kept the pressure on with so many others, that the Democrats in Congress were working on a means to silence us.

Dianne Feinstein wants to regulate who can and cannot be a reporter.  The Internet’s largest disseminator of news, Matt Drudge, called her a “Fascist”.

Yesterday, the Senate Judiciary Committee voted for a “Reporter Shield Bill” which would determine who is and who isn’t a journalist.

Here’s Senator Feinstein at the hearing:

Senator Feinstein proposed language that she said,”effectively sets up a test for establishing bona fide credentials that make one a legitimate journalist.”  Legitimate journalists will be protected.  Non-legitimate journalists, like blogs, will not.

As you might guess, this legislation would have created a situation in which the only “bona fide” journalists would be the ones who repeat their regressive talking points like good little sheep.  Remember when the White House said that FOX News wasn’t a “real” news outlet?  That would then extend to any source of information that did not tow the Democratic party line.  They would be no longer “bona fide.”  Then, Democratic operatives would target those sources.

Thankfully, a court has decided that the First Amendment applies to all Americans, and not just the organized liars at MSNBC.  Steve, at America’s Watchtower has more…

Today a Federal Appeals Court ruled that bloggers do indeed have protection under the First Amendment of the Constitution:

A federal appeals court ruled Friday that bloggers and the public have the same First Amendment protections as journalists when sued for defamation: If the issue is of public concern, plaintiffs have to prove negligence to win damages.

So, the Democrat’s efforts to create a “playing field” where bloggers can be sued out of existence for writing an opinion, or citing facts, has failed-for now.  However, they will be back.  As John Kerry points out, the regressives think we are far too stupid to be trusted with factual information, so sources of information outside of the government must be eliminated.  After all, how are we supposed to believe that global warming causes it to be cold?  How are we supposed to believe that a YouTube video caused Benghazi when it was so clearly a planned attack!  How are we supposed to blindly believe that ObamaCare is the best thing since sliced bread when the bloggers show how many people are losing hours, or their jobs, or their plans?

You get the idea.  We are dealing with a totalitarian government that is busy consolidating power.  To accomplish that, information must be controlled.  Bloggers are an obstacle to that, so we have to go.

Share

@JanaEschbach Interviews Smith Family Regarding #FreeKate Revelations, Supporters Still Trying Silence Truth Tellers

Share

Alleged Sex Offender Kaitlyn Hunt in Court

Jana Eschbach, reporter from CBS12, interviewed the Smith family regarding the new #FreeKate information that has been revealed at the Conservative Hideout, The Other McCain, The American Spectator, and Viral Read.  When Jeanette Runyon filed her FOIA request, she enabled this new information to be discussed at all levels of the media.  Here are some excerpts from the CBS12 interview…

Tonight in this CBS 12 exclusive, the victim’s family in this case separates the truth from the rumors.
 
The rumor: The Smiths turned Kate Hunt into police when she turned 18 because she had a gay relationship with their daughter.
With that accusation, Laurie and Jim Smith say they were harassed by phone and emails, threatened, and hated. People called them “gay-haters.” But they took the hits, they say to protect their then 14 year old daughter.
“I don’t think she understands that and I don’t know she ever until she becomes a mother.” said Laurie Smith, trying to describe the scrutiny and pressure on her family as the case caught fire in the media.
 
The truth: New documents released show Kate promised to end the relationship months before her arrest.
Confronted in emails by the Smith’s niece, Shanne Reason, Kate Hunt admits “I know I am 18 and I can get in trouble, but I understand the consequences.”
Kate promised to end it.
That’s not the story her “Stop the Hate Free Kate” movement told the media.
 
“I feel good knowing that they know, I didn’t lie.” Laurie said.

Please go and read the rest.  There is video at the site, and it could not be embedded.

Now, local media are reporting the truth about Kaitlyn Hunt and the #FreeKate supporters.

If you would like to see @ABC2020, the Today Show and @TCPalm update their stories as well, kindly contact them.  Here are links to the latest posts that expose the #FeeeKate lies…

#FreeKate Update: New Information Proves that Kaitlyn Hunt Knew That Her Relationship was Illegal, and That She Was Warned to End it

#FreeKate Update: Hunt Family Claims Anti-gay Bias, Police Investigation Finds None-Kelley Hunt Smith Engages in it?

#FreeKate Update: Victim Tried to Break Off Relationship, Kaitlyn Hunt ‘Wouldn’t Let Her,’ Described to Have ‘Problem With Lying’

Cbs 12 Exclusive: Kate Hunt’s Former Girlfriend’s Family Reacts to Her Sentence

And, of course, #FreeKate supporters are still lying in order  to ban people that tell the truth…

Mix still lyingSadly, anyone on the planet is able to see that Mr. Mix only seeks to silence the truth about #FreeKate.  By using false spam reports in an effort to silence people that tell the truth, he only harm’s his own cause.  His own actions speak to his motivations.   His bully tactics continue to backfire, yet that’s all he has to counter the truth.

Share

Shutuppery and You, Why the Left Wants to Silence You, Plus #FreeKate Relevancy

Share

In a recent post, R.S. McCain went over the fine liberal tradition of  Shutuppery…

Lady Liberty is a blogger, but she is also a mother worried about her children. Greg Flynn (an editor at the left-wing blog BlueNC.com, a former employee of the state department of education and a Democrat Party activist) apparently decided that identifying Lady Liberty by name would be a good way to shut her up, exposing her family to harassment from his radical Democrat allies. Every conservative in North Carolina — no, by God, every conservative in America — should be mad as hell about Greg Flynn‘s vicious intimidation tactics.

greg_flynn_north_carolina_democrat(Note that Flynn is using the strategy of “Accuse the Accuser,” and claiming that his “bullying” of Lady Liberty is actually Lady Liberty being a bully-That is another fine, liberal tradition, and will be covered in a future post)

Is it hyperbole to say that Lady Liberty should be concerned for her children’s safety?  Remember what Occupy Wall Street did to kids…

This also happened to blogger Sister Toldja…

Twitchy jumped on the story about Greg Flynn’s attempt to intimidate North Carolina blogger Lady Liberty, featuring Sister Toldjah’s story of how she was targeted by North Carolina Democrat activist Jeanne Bond and her “front group” Moving NC Forward.

This “outing” effort was initiated by, spurred on by Raleigh-area liberal activist/consultant/whatever she does Jeanne Bonds. #ncga #ncpol

— Sister Toldjah (@sistertoldjah) September 18, 2013

(#ncga #ncpol) 7-28, alliance btwn #TeamDumDum & Occupy Raleigh is revealed as they brag about doxing conservatives. pic.twitter.com/N1jt0Gi46M

— Sister Toldjah (@sistertoldjah) September 18, 2013

OK, why “out” Conservative bloggers?  I mean, the founders wrote the Federalist Papers under pen names, so why out bloggers?  Well, if you out a blogger, or any other political advocate, contributor, or even causal observer, they can be subjected to harassment until they decide to stop making political contributions or casual observations.  Here are examples…

Systematic Harassment of Prop 8 Supporters:

A loophole in California election laws made public the identity of any person that made a financial contribution above a set level.  That allowed Gay Rights activists to create a website called 8 Maps, that showed the names, addresses, and personal information on people that had contributed to the passage of Prop 8 in California.  Prop 8, in case you were unaware, was California’s now overturned ban on same sex marriage.  This is a small slice of the harassment meted out on the supporters…

That just oozes “tolerance” and “diversity,” doesn’t it?  Then again, the gay rights crowd used campaign contribution regs to find out who contributed to Prop 8, and created a map to their homes.

And the results of that?

More to the point, what Eightmaps intends to accomplish happened to me and my famly last year. And it was terrifying. Here’s the story:

Someone got my address from publicly available sources, made a malicious flyer with that information on it, went to the city’s homeless shelters and passed it around (the police told me that someone on staff at a shelter told them he saw a stranger distributing the flyers). The flyer told the homeless that if they came to my house, we’d give them money. This person did not care that it was summer, and he was tricking the poorest of the poor to a four-mile walk from the downtown shelters to my house. All he cared about was striking out at me.

We knew something was up after the second rough-looking person showed up demanding money, and got angry when he was told we had no idea what he was talking about. (All this happened when I was at work; imagine your wife opening the door to confront a homeless man who has just learned from her that he’d walked all that way in the heat for no reason). But we could tell they had some sort of flyer with our address on it. We called the police, who advised us to stall the next person who showed up, then call them on 911. That we did. Julie phoned me at work one day to say a scary-looking guy was at the front door with one of the flyers, and that she’d just called 911.

By the time I got home, the police were there questioning this guy, who looked like he’d wondered what the heck he’d gotten into. The cops said that this guy meant no harm, that he’d been the victim of this prankster just as we had. They also said he was a registered sex offender.

But wait…there’s more.

Harassment, Hostility, and Slurs

Several individuals who supported Proposition 8 reported receiving harassing telephone calls, e-mails, and mailings. Prop 8 supporters have reported receiving phone calls and voice mails calling them “bigot”[34] and using vulgar language.[35] Sometimes harassers called at work.[36] A public relations firm hired by the Yes on 8 Campaign received so many harassing phone calls from one person that the sheriff’s office became involved.[37] Other Prop 8 supporters received e-mails, letters, and postcards using vulgar language[38] and offensive labels like “gay hater.”[39] Through the contact form on his business’s Web site, one individual received an e-mail stating “burn in hell.”[40] One e-mail threatened to contact the parents of students at a school where a particular Prop 8 supporter worked.[41]

Harassment sometimes took other forms. For example, two women painted an arrow and the words “Bigots live here” on the window of an SUV and parked the vehicle in front of a household that had supported Prop 8.[42] In another case, an individual who supported Prop 8 found himself the subject of a flyer distributed in his town. The flyer included a photo of him, labeled him a “Bigot,” and stated his name, the amount of his donation to Prop 8, and his association with a particular Catholic Church.[43] At the University of California, Davis, a Yes on 8 table on the quad was reportedly attacked by a group of students throwing water balloons and shouting “you teach hate.”[44] A professor at Los Angeles City College allegedly told students in his class, “If you voted yes on Proposition 8, you are a fascist [expletive deleted].”[45] One Prop 8 supporter received a book, sent anonymously through Amazon.com, that contained “the greatest homosexual love stories of all time.”[46]

I would encourage you to visit the links. Though I quoted extensively, there is far, far more to see.  Death threats, violence, physical attacks, lost jobs, boycotts, and intimidation were used extensively.   All of these come right out of the “progressive”/Alinsky playbook.  And, as usual, the MSM didn’t say a thing about it.

This just happened in South Carolina last week, when a blogger exposed some re-writing of the Constitution by a public school teacher…

The post went viral. It has been viewed more than 100,000 times on the site alone and has been picked up by multiple websites in less than 2 days. Though the issue is more of a Fourth and Fifth Amendment issue than it is a Second Amendment one, gun owners were enraged.

Joshua Cook tells us in an exclusive interview that he received a phone call from the Spartanburg, SC District 1 superintendent Dr. Ron Garner. According to Cook, Dr. Garner called him at work and demanded he retract the story. Abrupt and yelling, Dr. Garner threatened Cook that lawyers were now involved in the case.

“I just don’t understand how he got all my information. He told me where I went to College and the town I grew up in. He had been monitoring my social media sites too. He called me at work also, which was strange. How did he know I worked at this office? When I asked him where the teacher got the curriculum he refused to answer,” says Cook.

This is also why the Democrats wanted to pass a law known as the “Disclose Act,” which would identify every donor, and open up the Conservative ones to harassment…

Working against the “progressives” is the fact that prohibitions against anonymous political activity goes against legal precedent…

Former Federal Election Commission chair Bradley Smith lays out other arguments in favor of anonymous political speech in a contemporary context:

[Election] disclosure regulations are some of the most burdensome. Disclosure limits free speech because it allows the government to retaliate against people. The Supreme Court has consistently held that people do have a right to anonymous speech. The cases speak for themselves.

The most prominent one is probably NAACP v. Alabama (1964), when Alabama wanted to know who was funding the NAACP’s activities. We can see how that would be intimidating. Then there’s McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Commission (1995). McIntyre was doing anonymous brochures against a school tax, which all the school officials supported. She had children in the schools who needed grades and access to such things as athletic teams and bands. She didn’t necessarily want her name known, even though it was important for her to fight this issue. Another major case was Brown v. Socialist Workers ’74 Campaign Committee (1982). The socialists rightly said, “If we have to reveal our donors, they won’t give us money. They will get harassed. Their businesses will get blackballed and that sort of thing.” Disclosure can be more inhibiting than people think.

Which is something to think about when people already in power push legislation such as The DISCLOSE Act, which would force groups to list donors and reveal their names in advertisements. The DISCLOSE Act is in part a response to this year’s controversial Citizen’s United v. Federal Election Commission ruling by the Supreme Court. Hyperbolically likened by critics to the infamous Dred Scott decision, Citizen’s United dealt with a documentary film censored by the government and broadened the speech rights of corporations, unions, and nonprofits. Far from opening American politics up to undue influence by unspecificed foreigners (as President Obama has charged), the ruling makes it easier for smaller groups and individuals to spread their messages.

In other words, it is a long term pattern for liberal, “progressive,” or Democrat (or do I repeat myself) activists to identify, harass, and threaten Conservatives.

We’ve seen this in #FreeKate as well. We saw the #FreeKate admins try to silence people by identifying them, and digging up “dirt” on them. Rather than discussing the merits of an argument, they attempt to end the argument by eliminating the opposition.

Why do this? To silence dissent, of course.  Sister Toldja has a great blog, and runs stories all over the Conservative spectrum.  Lady Liberty was opposed to Common Core, the vile, garbage filled education curricula that the Obama Administration is forcing on the nation’s schools. And, since liberals are “reality deprived,” they are incapable of discussing their policies in a civil manner. So, they attack anyone who disagrees with them.

There is one snag with this methodology. It is based on the old Alinsky Method. In years past, liberals could do flyers in a neighborhood to shame or embarrass someone into silence. They could send protesters to harass the children of a target at their school. They could make threatening calls, show that they know all of the target’s information, and they make all manner of threats.

With social media, these activities are far less effective. In the past, people would suffer in isolation at the hands of liberal groups such as ACORN, who were well known for harassing family members, business associates, friends, and even the children of their targets. Now, with blogs, YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, and others, a “target” can expose their tormentors to public scrutiny. 10 years ago, Flynn’s harassment of Lady Liberty might have silenced her. If she didn’t want Democrat/liberal goons harassing her, or her kids, she would have shut up. Now, instead, Flynn is now know by a far wider audience as a douchenozzle, who far fewer people will ever again take seriously. Sunlight is the best disinfectant for these kind of activities, and if one is willing to take a stand, they can successfully fend off this harassment.

In the end, the good guys can still win, if you are willing to take some lumps and persevere.

NOTE:  The Conservative Hideout does not recommend direct contact, harassment, or making death threats towards any individual of group.  We are not liberals.  We have standards for ourselves, and it is important that we live up to them as best as we can.  We have the truth on our side.  If we use that, we have no need for thug tactics.  -Matt

Linked by NC Renegade.  Thanks!

Share

Senator Feintein’s Attack on Free Speech

Share

govt-censorship

I guess, if she wants to wipe out the Second Amendment, show might as well go after the First as well, right?

I have often said that liberals don’t necessarily ban something outright, they just make it a practical impossibility to practice said right.  That appears to be what Diane Feinstein (Douche-Nozzle, California) is up to.  Here is some video via Gateway Pundit…

OK, here is the my take…

1.  According to Feinstein, the only people protected by the law are “legitimate journalists.” How much you want to bet only people that tow the regressive line will be recognized?  It may not happen immediately, but it will get there.

2.  They want bloggers out of business.  Remember how John Kerry remarked how all of this “information”, “makes it harder to govern?”

“Well, folks,” he said, “ever since the end of the Cold War, forces have been unleashed that were tamped down for centuries by dictators, and that was complicated further by this little thing called the internet and the ability of people everywhere to communicate instantaneously and to have more information coming at them in one day than most people can process in months or a year.

“It makes it much harder to govern, makes it much harder to organize people, much harder to find the common interest,” said Kerry, “and that is complicated by a rise of sectarianism and religious extremism that is prepared to employ violent means to impose on other people a way of thinking and a way of living that is completely contrary to everything the United States of America has ever stood for. So we need to keep in mind what our goals are and how complicated this world is that we’re operating in.”

You see, in the eyes of our would-be regressive overlords, an informed public is an unruly public.  And, if only MSNBC was the only source of news, the sheeple would be far more compliant.  Getting rid of bloggers would go a long way towards achieving this.  In the end, big brother really hates competition.

Share

8th Grader Suspended and Arrested for NRA T-Shirt

Share

When liberals run schools, there subject the children to, among other things, “tolerance and diversity.”  Now, the irony of “tolerance diversity” is that it only extends to those that agree 100% with the regressive agenda.  If you have an opinion that differs one iota from the regressive line?  Well, then to forces of “tolerance and diversity” become rather intolerant.  Just ask Jared Marcum.  He is an eighth grade student, whose school did not like his NRA t-shirt, so they had him arrested and suspended when he refused to change it.  WOWK has more…

WOWK 13 Charleston, Huntington WV News, Weather, Sports
And, as the TV report indicates, the shirt in question does not violate school policy, yet they took some rather extreme actions against him. Here is a bit more from WOWK…

“I don’t’ see how anybody would have an issue with a hunting rifle and NRA put on a t-shirt, especially when policy doesn’t forbid it,” Lardieri said.

The Logan County School District’s dress code policy prohibits clothing that displays profanity, violence, discriminatory messages and more but nowhere in the document does it say anything about gun images.

“He did not violate any school policy,” Lardieri reiterates. “He did not become aggressive.”

Now, Lardieri says he’s ready to fight until the situation is made right.

“I will go to the ends of the earth, I will call people, I will write letters, I will do everything in the legal realm to make sure this does not happen again,” Lardieri said.

So, combine power and authority, the regressive agenda, and an otherwise innocent school kid, and this is what you get. Seems to me that the family has a rather good lawsuit on their hands.


Share

Massive Projection on Display: Democrat Hank Johnson Wants to Limit Free Speech

Share

We like to say that you always know what the Democrats are up to based on what they accuse everyone else of doing.  Here’s Hank Johnson, a Democratic Congress critter, on why he thinks free speech is a terrible thing…

OK, let’s look at some points here…

“They control the patterns of thinking,” said Johnson. “They control the media. They control the messages that you get. So, you are being taught to hate your government – don’t want government, but keep your hands off of my Medicare by the way. I mean, we are all confused people and we’re poking fingers at each other saying, well you’re black, you’re Hispanic, immigration, homosexuals. You know, we’re lost on the social issues, abortion, contraception.

Is this guy serious?  If this is so, why has every single Obama-related scandal been played down by the MSM?  If the corporations are in control, why haven’t the people heard of what really happened at Benghazi?  Why didn’t they know that ObamaCare would cause job losses and people’s hours to be cut?  Why don’t they know about “fast and the furious?”  Why did they lie about Sandra Fluke and $9 birth control at Target?  Why did they invent a war on women that didn’t exist?  Why didn’t they cover the voter fraud that occurred during the election?

I could go on for hours, but it does show how close to completely demented that they are.  They are essentially saying that the corporations are doing all of the things that the MSM is doing on behalf of Obama and the Democrats.

And let me guess, Corporations, whose workers voluntarily work, and whose customers voluntarily buy, are not people.  But, Unions, whose members are forced to join, are, right?

Projection is quite revealing, as it shows us what the other side is thinking and doing.

 

Share

New York vs First Amendment: Seeks to Make it Easier for Leftist Goons to Target Critics by Banning Anonymous Speech

Share

From the Federalist Papers, to the Internet today, anonymous political speech has been a mainstay of political discourse in the US.  It is frankly needed, as there is often negative consequences to speaking out against the status quo.  And, in other countries, the results can be somewhat terminal.  Since it is difficult to track down, harrass,  intimidate, beat, or even kill anonymous speakers, the NY State Legislature has decide to ban it.  David Kravets, at Wired, has more...

Did you hear the one about the New York state lawmakers who forgot about the First Amendment in the name of combating cyberbullying and “baseless political attacks”?

Proposed legislation in both chambers would require New York-based websites, such as blogs and newspapers, to “remove any comments posted on his or her website by an anonymous poster unless such anonymous poster agrees to attach his or her name to the post.”

No votes on the measures have been taken. But unless the First Amendment is repealed, they stand no chance of surviving any constitutional scrutiny even if they were approved.

Republican Assemblyman Jim Conte said the legislation would cut down on “mean-spirited and baseless political attacks” and “turns the spotlight on cyberbullies by forcing them to reveal their identity.”

Had the internet been around in the late 1700s, perhaps the anonymously written Federalist Papers would have to be taken down unless Alexander Hamilton, James Madison and John Jay revealed themselves.

But, taking things, like the Federalist Papers, down is the general idea.  We have covered many examples of why statists hate anonymous speech, and what they do to people they can identify…

Well, let’s take a look at what happened to people that were found to have made donations to efforts that “progressives” do not like.  First, here is some details that I covered in past years.

First up, here is an article from Human Events.

No matter that Prejean was representing California, majorities of whose voters have twice voted to enshrine in their constitution the exact belief Prejean articulated on stage.

The real apology needed to come from homosexual activists who, immediately after more than six million Californians voted last November to uphold the traditional definition of marriage, participated in riot-like protests across the nation.

Conservative churches were picketed and vandalized, and church services were disrupted.  Envelopes containing white powder were sent to several Mormon temples. And a postcard sent to the homes and businesses of many financial donors of Proposition 8 read:  “If I had a gun, I would have gunned you down along with each and every other supporter.”  Other donors were forced to resign from their jobs after they were revealed as contributors to the Prop 8 effort.

This may seem like a harsh reaction to democracy in action.  But the gay rights movement has always had an erratic relationship with basic democratic values.

Last May, gay activists shut down an American Psychiatric Association panel because two evangelicals were scheduled to appear. Ahead of the California vote, San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom declared that same-sex marriage was coming to California “whether you like it or not.”  Recently, a student at Los Angeles City College sued the school after a professor called him a “fascist bastard” and refused to allow him to finish a speech against gay marriage during a public speaking class.

That just oozes “tolerance” and “diversity,” doesn’t it?  Then again, the gay rights crowd used campaign contribution regs to find out who contributed to Prop 8, and created a map to their homes.

And the results of that?

More to the point, what Eightmaps intends to accomplish happened to me and my famly last year. And it was terrifying. Here’s the story:

Someone got my address from publicly available sources, made a malicious flyer with that information on it, went to the city’s homeless shelters and passed it around (the police told me that someone on staff at a shelter told them he saw a stranger distributing the flyers). The flyer told the homeless that if they came to my house, we’d give them money. This person did not care that it was summer, and he was tricking the poorest of the poor to a four-mile walk from the downtown shelters to my house. All he cared about was striking out at me.

We knew something was up after the second rough-looking person showed up demanding money, and got angry when he was told we had no idea what he was talking about. (All this happened when I was at work; imagine your wife opening the door to confront a homeless man who has just learned from her that he’d walked all that way in the heat for no reason). But we could tell they had some sort of flyer with our address on it. We called the police, who advised us to stall the next person who showed up, then call them on 911. That we did. Julie phoned me at work one day to say a scary-looking guy was at the front door with one of the flyers, and that she’d just called 911.

By the time I got home, the police were there questioning this guy, who looked like he’d wondered what the heck he’d gotten into. The cops said that this guy meant no harm, that he’d been the victim of this prankster just as we had. They also said he was a registered sex offender.

But wait…there’s more.

Harassment, Hostility, and Slurs

Several individuals who supported Proposition 8 reported receiving harassing telephone calls, e-mails, and mailings. Prop 8 supporters have reported receiving phone calls and voice mails calling them “bigot”[34] and using vulgar language.[35] Sometimes harassers called at work.[36] A public relations firm hired by the Yes on 8 Campaign received so many harassing phone calls from one person that the sheriff’s office became involved.[37] Other Prop 8 supporters received e-mails, letters, and postcards using vulgar language[38] and offensive labels like “gay hater.”[39] Through the contact form on his business’s Web site, one individual received an e-mail stating “burn in hell.”[40] One e-mail threatened to contact the parents of students at a school where a particular Prop 8 supporter worked.[41]

Harassment sometimes took other forms. For example, two women painted an arrow and the words “Bigots live here” on the window of an SUV and parked the vehicle in front of a household that had supported Prop 8.[42] In another case, an individual who supported Prop 8 found himself the subject of a flyer distributed in his town. The flyer included a photo of him, labeled him a “Bigot,” and stated his name, the amount of his donation to Prop 8, and his association with a particular Catholic Church.[43] At the University of California, Davis, a Yes on 8 table on the quad was reportedly attacked by a group of students throwing water balloons and shouting “you teach hate.”[44] A professor at Los Angeles City College allegedly told students in his class, “If you voted yes on Proposition 8, you are a fascist [expletive deleted].”[45] One Prop 8 supporter received a book, sent anonymously through Amazon.com, that contained “the greatest homosexual love stories of all time.”[46]

So, as you can see.  These bills have one main goal-identify dissenting individuals so they can be harassed, and otherwise intimidated into silence.  It does not intend to stop “bullying,”it aims to facilitate it.

 

Share

Limbaugh Advertiser to Liberals: Bring it!

Share

I’ve said, quite a few times, that while the leftists have an impressive punch, their play book is paper thin.  They do the typical astroturf email and phone harassment campaigns, send in thugs by the busload, and do the typical harassment of children, employers, and business associates.  However, in reality, they are very small, yet highly organized.  They count on being far more noisy than their actual influence would indicate.  In other words, they make a ton of noise, but it’s just that-noise.  Then, if one buys into the “fact” that the protesters actually represent anything more than the Democratic party, they give in, and the thugs are then encouraged to seek out more prey.

But, if people resist, and stand up to the bullies, the situation takes on an entirely flavor.  We saw in Wisconsin, when the goons threatened businesses that did not put up posters or sign petitions condemning Governor Walker.  Instead of caving, the businesses went public.  Then, the pressure went onto the unions, who were, in fact, committing extortion via a protection scheme.  We also saw it again during last summer’s Verizon strike, when bloggers and other citizen journalists recorded the union’s activities and posted them for all to see.

And, now, we’re still watching the aftereffects of left’s efforts to silence Conservative talk radio, and that genre’s primary figure, Rush Limbaugh.  The plan has been to subject the sponsors of the program to a campaign of astroturf in order to put the show off the air.  However, one of those advertisers, Mark Stevens,  came forward and discussed what he was experiencing…

“They’ve called my people and my company, they’ve called the women at my company, and told them they’re women haters, the most horrible terms,” Stevens said. “They’ve told me — these are tens of thousands of emails, by the way, most of them are positive but the small group — they’ve told us that we’re under surveillance. The email subject line says ‘citizen of the internet,’ ‘police of the Internet,’ ‘Mark, you’re in danger,’ ‘your house is going to be surrounded by buses,’ ‘your business is going to be destroyed,’ ‘your people are in trouble.’ This is terrorism. Why don’t we start calling it what it is?”

Indeed, it is terrorism.  But more practically, the leftists are resorting to mafia tactics…

“That’s a nice (home, business, family) that you have there, would be a shame if something were to happen to it…”

Again, this is more than likely mass emails and calls, coming from the same place, or even a makeshift call center.  It’s an manufactured  astroturf scheme that is nothing more than an attempt to make the protesters look far more impressive and numerous than they really are.

But Stevens wasn’t done…

“Let them come,” Stevens said. “Something is going on here that has to be addressed because the country’s at risk. If I can’t advertise where I want to advertise, my business, because of a small group of people who – you can tell, because the vast majority of the emails are in support of us, Rush, the constitution, the American way – a small portion of people, that I call the hissyfitters, who are like children. When my kids were little, they used to go on a screaming fit, and they lay down on the floor and slapped their hands on the floor. My wife and I had a choice, whether to give them an ice cream cone or make them go to their room. Too much of what‘s going on in America right now is we’re giving these hissyfitters an ice cream cone. We have to stop it, and I’m not afraid, and bring on the buses.”

Stevens nailed it.

In the end, more people need to come forward, and make a stand.  Tell the thugs that their nonsensical tantrums will change nothing.  And, if they show up with buses, record their stupidity, and post it on line for all to see.  It strikes me that the Alinksy Method works very well in a media vacuum.  That no longer exists, thanks to the internet.  With an exponentially greater access to real information, the people can see what the advocates of the Alinsky Method really are-spoiled children who behave foolishly.

Once people realize that the leftists, and their shrill whining, is nothing more than the attack of a clumsy child, the sooner the Alinskyites will lose their power and influence.

Share

While we were distracted did we lose free speech? (H.R. 347)

Share

While we were being distracted by the Sandra Fluke-Rush Limbaugh debacle last week somehow we lost some more of our liberties; liberties that are protected by OUR constitution. This time the target is free speech. Yes you heard right we may have lost our ability to express ourselves through the act of protesting the government and it sneaked in right under our radar.  Yesterday morning while I was getting ready for work I caught Judge Napolitano on Fox and Friends talking about how last week President Obama had signed into law H.R. 347. Below is the Fox and Friends clip of this interview.

How I missed this, I don’t know.  What I do know is that since the turn of the year our President has violated the constitution three times.  First back in January when he bypassed congress and made four appointments to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and the National Labor Relations Board while congress was still in proforma session. We did not hear a peep from the left and those illegal appointments still stand.  The second violation came when he signed into law the NDAA which has a provision in it that authorizes the government to detain American citizens indefinitely if suspected of ties to terrorist organizations.  And now we have H.R. 347 the Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act.  Below is the congressional summary of the law.

2/6/2012–Passed Senate amended. (This measure has not been amended since it was reported to the Senate on November 17, 2011. The summary of that version is repeated here.) Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011 – Amends the federal criminal code to revise the prohibition against entering restricted federal buildings or grounds to impose criminal penalties on anyone who knowingly enters any restricted building or grounds without lawful authority. Defines “restricted buildings or grounds” as a posted, cordoned off, or otherwise restricted area of: (1) the White House or its grounds or the Vice President’s official residence or its grounds, (2) a building or grounds where the President or other person protected by the Secret Service is or will be temporarily visiting, or (3) a building or grounds so restricted due to a special event of national significance.

I’m not a fan of the progressive group called The Young Turks; however in the below video they even seem a bit concerned that an environment has been created to limit free speech. Just skip the ad.

This is not good folks and what’s worse yet is 224 House Republicans supported this unconstitutional act.Michele Bachmann who claims to be a staunch supporter of the constitution voted yes along with Allen West.  I’m sure their intentions were to diminish the ability of the disorderly and loud OWS protestors to disrupt the workings of government; however this is a net that has the power to snare all types of potential protests to include the orderly and patriotic tea party protests. Folks this is wrong on so many levels I don’t even know where to begin.  And my guess is our elected representatives know in their hearts this is wrong.  This is why they quietly passed this terrible bill.  You can see how your representative voted here>>

Three times since the turn of the year our constitution has clearly been violated and there has been zero consequences for these actions. I wrote my elected representative (Rick Berg) when the President made his proforma appointments and all I got was lip service.  This is the same guy who wants me to vote for him as a candidate for the Senate.  Why should I?  He also supported H.R. 347 and voted yes.  This tells me I have an elected representative who really doesn’t care about or takes the constitution very seriously.  The only time we get overwhelming bi-partisan support on bills these days is when they somehow curb our liberties.  Funny how that works.  Based on my readings about the type of men the founders were, I believe I know what they would do about these bills and acts.  First off, bills like the NDAA and H.R. 347 would never had made it through the Senate or House. Red flags would have went up all over the place and these bills would have been easily defeated.  So what does this tell about the men and women who represent us.  It tells me just how much they’re missing the mark in regards to our founding fathers.  They’re 180 degrees out.  Secondly our founders would have immediately began impeachment proceedings against any President for signing these bills into law.  The President is required to act in a manner that does not violate the law of the land and in these instances he has failed.

How many more liberties do we need to lose before we finally wake up and realize that the men and women who are supposed to serve us believe they are our masters with a blank check to do whatever they want?  How much longer are we going to stand by and watch our constitution shredded with each bill/act signed into law.  How much more can America take before we lose her?  I say again how much more…

You can read more about this topic at Bunkerville.

Liberty forever, freedom for all.

Original Post:  The Sentry Journal

Share

“Tolerance and Diversity” on Display: Biblical Stance on Homosexuality Bullying?

Share

Ah, the left.  They live in a land of duckies and bunnies, with unicorns that fart rainbows.  And, if you ask them, they are by far the most tolerant, diverse, and loving people in all of the world…unless, that is, you disagree with them.  For those that have a different point of view, or have the audacity to engage in dissent, all pretenses of “tolerance” disappears.  Dissenters are ridiculed, accused, accosted, punished, and sometimes physically attacked.  For, you see, tolerance is a one way street for our liberal friends.  For the latest example of this “tolerance,” we have to look at the story of a student that based an op-ed on, of all things, the Bible! 

A 15-year-old Wisconsin boy who wrote an op-ed opposing gay adoptions was censored, threatened with suspension and called ignorant by the superintendent of the Shawano School District, according to an attorney representing the child.

Wegner, a student at Shawano High School, was asked to write an op-ed for the school newspaper about whether gays should be allowed to adopt. Wegner, who is a Christian, wrote in opposition. Another student wrote in favor of allowing gays to adopt.

Wegner used Bible passages to defend his argument, including Scripture that called homosexuality a sin.

After the op-ed was published, a gay couple whose child attend s the high school, complained.

The school immediately issued an apology – stating Wegner’s opinion was a “form of bullying and disrespect.”

“Offensive articles cultivating a negative environment of disrespect are not appropriate or condoned by the Shawano School District,” the statement read. “We sincerely apologize to anyone we may have offended and are taking steps to prevent items of this nature from happening in the future.”

So, the student writes an op-ed, in what seems to be a point-counterpoint format, with another student.  That might have been OK, but the student had the nerve to disagree with liberal doctrine.  But, what the school then allegedly did was more outrageous…

But Staver said what the school system did next was absolutely outrageous. He said the 15-year-old was ordered to the superintendent’s office where he was subjected to hours of meetings and was accused of violating the school’s bullying policy.

“The superintendent called him ignorant and said he had the power to suspend him,” Staver said. “He’s using his position to bully this student. This is absolutely the epitome of intolerance.”

Staver said the boy’s parents were never notified.

At one point, Staver said the superintendent gave him a chance to say he regretted writing the column.

“When Mr. Wegner stated that he did not regret writing it, and that he stood behind his beliefs, Superintendent Carlson told him that he ‘had got to be one of the most ignorant kids to try to argue with him about this topic,’” Staver said.

At that point, Staver said the superintendent told the boy that “we have the power to suspend you if we want to.”

The superintendent allegedly told Wegner that he was personally offended by Wegner’s column.

So, it appears that the kid was removed, taken to the superintendent, to “convince” him to apologize for his position.  In actuality, it appears that the school tried to bully the kid for taking a biblical stance on a social issue.  This is a familiar pattern:  liberals decided that they are infallible, and any disagreement with them is “hate.”  Then, once someone engages in “hate,” liberals can engage in real hate to punish the dissenter.  It is yet another manifestation of the leftist tendency to control, subjugate, and otherwise engage in tyranny.  In this case, over thought itself.

We also now have to add that anti-bullying rules at schools are going to be used against Christians, Jews, or anyone else that dares to cite the Word in schools.  People should be warned, but, at the same time, be bold, and refuse to back down from the schools, or any other servants of the really bad guy that resides down below.

And your kids are in public school why?

H/T:  The Daley Gator

Share

Same old ChiComs: Blogger Jailed for Criticizing Regime, Social Networks Lose Anonymity

Share

So, it seems that it still a pretty bad idea to criticize the ChiComs via a blog…

Turns out China is a tyranny where criticism of the government can result in aprison sentence:

A Chinese court has handed down a 10-year jail sentence to Chen Xi, the second dissident in four days to be convicted of inciting subversion through online essays…

The intermediate people’s court in Guiyang, in south-west China’s Guizhou region, tried Chen Xi, 57, on charges linked to more than 30 political essays he published online.

“The judge said this was a major crime that had a malign impact,” his wife, Zhang Qunxuan, told Reuters by phone after the trial. The judge said Chen was a repeat offender who deserved a long sentence, she added.

If you hit the link, and go over to Verum Serum, you’ll get the details on how Chinese citizens joining social networks, like Twitter, must now give their full name when registering.

If you recall, our own regressives wanted to make all campaign donations public.  You know, with everyone’s name and personal information for all to see, so they could be harassed by regressive minions.  I covered the (failed) Disclose Act this past February, illustrating what had happened when people had disagreed with the tolerant and diverse regressives, and those same regressives found out where they lived…

That just oozes “tolerance” and “diversity,” doesn’t it?  Then again, the gay rights crowd used campaign contribution regs to find out who contributed to Prop 8, and created a map to their homes.

And the results of that?

More to the point, what Eightmaps intends to accomplish happened to me and my famly last year. And it was terrifying. Here’s the story:

Someone got my address from publicly available sources, made a malicious flyer with that information on it, went to the city’s homeless shelters and passed it around (the police told me that someone on staff at a shelter told them he saw a stranger distributing the flyers). The flyer told the homeless that if they came to my house, we’d give them money. This person did not care that it was summer, and he was tricking the poorest of the poor to a four-mile walk from the downtown shelters to my house. All he cared about was striking out at me.

We knew something was up after the second rough-looking person showed up demanding money, and got angry when he was told we had no idea what he was talking about. (All this happened when I was at work; imagine your wife opening the door to confront a homeless man who has just learned from her that he’d walked all that way in the heat for no reason). But we could tell they had some sort of flyer with our address on it. We called the police, who advised us to stall the next person who showed up, then call them on 911. That we did. Julie phoned me at work one day to say a scary-looking guy was at the front door with one of the flyers, and that she’d just called 911.

By the time I got home, the police were there questioning this guy, who looked like he’d wondered what the heck he’d gotten into. The cops said that this guy meant no harm, that he’d been the victim of this prankster just as we had. They also said he was a registered sex offender.

But wait…there’s more.

Harassment, Hostility, and Slurs

Several individuals who supported Proposition 8 reported receiving harassing telephone calls, e-mails, and mailings. Prop 8 supporters have reported receiving phone calls and voice mails calling them “bigot”[34] and using vulgar language.[35] Sometimes harassers called at work.[36] A public relations firm hired by the Yes on 8 Campaign received so many harassing phone calls from one person that the sheriff’s office became involved.[37] Other Prop 8 supporters received e-mails, letters, and postcards using vulgar language[38] and offensive labels like “gay hater.”[39] Through the contact form on his business’s Web site, one individual received an e-mail stating “burn in hell.”[40] One e-mail threatened to contact the parents of students at a school where a particular Prop 8 supporter worked.[41]

Harassment sometimes took other forms. For example, two women painted an arrow and the words “Bigots live here” on the window of an SUV and parked the vehicle in front of a household that had supported Prop 8.[42] In another case, an individual who supported Prop 8 found himself the subject of a flyer distributed in his town. The flyer included a photo of him, labeled him a “Bigot,” and stated his name, the amount of his donation to Prop 8, and his association with a particular Catholic Church.[43] At the University of California, Davis, a Yes on 8 table on the quad was reportedly attacked by a group of students throwing water balloons and shouting “you teach hate.”[44] A professor at Los Angeles City College allegedly told students in his class, “If you voted yes on Proposition 8, you are a fascist [expletive deleted].”[45] One Prop 8 supporter received a book, sent anonymously through Amazon.com, that contained “the greatest homosexual love stories of all time.”[46]

In a sense, even the ChiComs are playing catch-up to our regressives.  Removing anonymity is a means to subject people to punishment when they offer opinions that run counter to the government, or their ideological allies.  Therefore, we shouldn’t be surprised when statists of any stripe propose means to identify, and target, political opponents.

Share

SOPA and the Blogger: Potential for Censorship?

Share

There has been a great deal of debate going on about the Stop Online Piracy Act.  Some think it’s a massive threat to on-line freedom, and others consider it much ado about nothing.

For the side critical SOPA, here are some points from the Heritage Foundation:

Lawsuits Authorized  

As it is currently drafted, this is how SOPA would work: First, it allows the U.S. Attorney General, as well as individual intellectual property holders, to sue allegedly infringing sites in court. The site would have to be proven to be a foreign site “directed towards” the U.S. and that it would be subject to seizure if it were U.S.-based. Alternatively, a suit could be brought by a private plaintiff, who would have to show that the site is “dedicated to theft of U.S. property.” That test, in turn, can be met if the site or a portion of the site is “primarily” designed, operated, or marketed to “enable or facilitate” infringement. The bill requires that attempts be made to notify the website operator of any such legal action, but legal proceedings would go forward even if no response is received.            

If the court finds in favor of the plaintiff, a range of third-party restrictions would go into effect. Specifically, in cases brought by the Attorney General, to the extent “technically feasible and reasonable,” a court order would:

  1. Require Internet service providers to prevent subscribers from reaching the website in question. This would be done by severing the mechanism by which the domain name entered by Web users is connected (“resolved”) to the proper IP address;
  2. Prohibit search engines such as Google from providing direct links to the foreign website in search results;
  3. Prohibit payment network providers, such as PayPal or credit card firms, from completing financial transactions affecting the site; and
  4. Bar Internet advertising firms from placing online ads from or to the affected website.

In cases brought by a private party, only the restrictions on payment networks and advertising firms would apply.

The current version of the legislation, offered as a manager’s amendment in committee, omits a number of controversial provisions that were included in prior versions of SOPA. Most notably, a process that allowed holders of intellectual property rights to trigger third-party obligations without a court order was dropped. This and other recent changes represent a real improvement in the legislation.

Liberals hate it too, and my perception is that they are upset with the crony Capitalism stench to it.  I happen to agree.  However, their focus is left of center, and they’re concentrating on the entertainment industry, rather than the government.  Yes, the MPAA and the RIAA are heavily involved, but they wouldn’t be at the trough had the government not empowered itself to create the trough in the first place.  No power-no cronies.  It’s that simple.  Don’t get me wrong, I think this legislation is bad news, and I’m glad that it’s nearly universally hated-it’s just that some of our “allies” have a bass akwards view of the cause, as well as the solution.

Also, some people see SOPA as an non-issue…

I swear some people ought not be allowed near a computer — much less drive! :roll:

The conservative and liberal blogospheres are unifying behind opposition to Congress’s Stop Online Piracy Act, with right-leaning bloggers aruging their very existence could be wiped out if the anti-piracy bill passes.

“If either the U.S. Senate’s Protect IP Act (PIPA) & the U.S. House’s Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) become law, political blogs such as Red Mass Group [conservative] & Blue Mass Group [liberal] will cease to exist,” wrote a blogger at Red Mass Group.

Some have asserted that the controversial measures would criminalize pages and blogs that link to foreign websites dedicated to online piracy. In particular, this has concerned search engines like Google, which could face massive liability if some form of the bill passes, some say.

via SOPA is the end of us, say bloggers – Tim Mak – POLITICO.com.

Alright, allow me to be the resident idiot who happens to have a little common sense. Here is a novel idea:

DON’T LINK TO OVERSEAS SITES THAT ARE DEDICATED TO ONLINE PIRACY!

I hate to say this; but….duh! :roll:

I must repectfully disagree, because I follow one “law” in looking at legislation…

Matt’s First Law of Legislation:  All legislation should be viewed through the prism of how it will, one day, be abused.  

The idea is simple:  when the government grants itself power of some sort, it is only a matter of time before it is abused.  As for SOPA, I can, one day, seeing it used against sites opposed to the government, or it’s current ideology.  I can see a liberal judge reading something into it that isn’t in the actual text of the legislation.  I can see it being expanded by future Congresses to encompass things that it was never intended to regulate.  In other words, if the government grants itself a power, it isn’t a question of if it will be abused, it is a question of when.

In the end, the state is the enemy, and we should never give it more bullets to fire at us.

Share