Home  FAQ  Search  Memberlist  Usergroups  KDR  Register  Log in  

Share | 
 

 Bloggers Beware - They're Coming After You!

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
AuthorMessage
ScoutsHonor



Posts : 1360
Join date : 2009-10-20

PostSubject: Bloggers Beware - They're Coming After You!   Fri 28 May 2010, 8:05 pm

Here's a startling announcement from our creepy Congresspersons. I guess we have sufficiently stood so still for everything they've dished out that they are now thoroughly at home with declaring that: we have no right to free speech. Unbelievable, and sad.

Quote :

Bloggers Beware – They’re Coming After You!


By: Rep. Tom Price (R-GA)


Just when you thought it was safe to start expressing your right to free speech, Democrats in Congress are gearing up for a vote on a new piece of legislation to blatantly undermine the First Amendment. Known as the DISCLOSE Act (HR 5175), this bill – written by the head of the Democrats’ congressional campaign committee – is their response to the recent Supreme Court ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. In short, the Supreme Court found that the government could not restrict the free speech rights of individuals or other entities wishing to participate in the political dialogue.

It is hard to see how establishing a level playing field for free speech – as our Founding Fathers did by making it a right under the Constitution and which the Supreme Court upheld – is a threat to our democracy. Nevertheless, the White House and their allies on Capitol Hill see honest criticism as a threat to forcing their big government, liberal agenda through Congress. So, there is no time like the present – namely five months before an election – to start putting the muzzle on those individuals and organizations not sticking to the Democrats’ talking points.

Under the DISCLOSE Act, certain incorporated entities would be restricted in how they can exercise their free speech rights. There is an exemption for some in the media sphere like newspapers, TV news, and the like. However, there is one driving force in today’s public debate that is NOT exempt. Bloggers will not have the same exemption provided to other media sources. Never mind that the Supreme Court’s opinion in the Citizens United case stated, “Differential treatment of media corporations and other corporations cannot be squared with the First Amendment.”

For many bloggers to exercise their free speech rights, they would have to jump through the same onerous new hoops as many businesses, nonprofit groups, and even such threats to democracy as your local chamber of commerce. If this sounds like an absurd overreach by one party in power, I invite you to take a look at their government takeover of health care, taxpayer-funded bailouts, and general hostility to private sector economic growth.

The Obama Administration and Congressional Democrats have not racked up a stellar record of transparency and openness. For a White House that touted its willingness to engage critics openly in hopes of staving off greater partisan rancor, Obama’s team has endorsed backroom deal-making, special giveaways to garner support for their agenda, and a closed-door decision-making process that has the American people more fed up with Washington. Now, under their brand of leadership, they stand ready to stifle free speech via legislative fiat.

Democrats should not be allowed to give themselves carte blanche to shut down the ability of those in the blogosphere or elsewhere to participate in our nation’s collective dialogue. That flies in the face of our most sacred rights as American citizens.


The sponsor of this bill is Christopher Hollen, D-Maryland.
http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h5175/show
Back to top Go down
View user profile
C1
Admin


Posts : 1611
Join date : 2009-10-19

PostSubject: Re: Bloggers Beware - They're Coming After You!   Sat 29 May 2010, 2:32 am

Is this the original source for the article?

http://biggovernment.com/tprice/2010/05/27/bloggers-beware-theyre-coming-after-you/

I read that and got cross-eyed over all the convoluted arguments and vectoring.

First, it says that "The Supreme Court found that the government could not restrict the free speech rights of individuals or other entities wishing to participate in the political dialogue." But wait a minute, those "other entities" are public private partnerships, called corporations, that are a creation of the state. No state instrument has the power of Free Speech, that is reserved only for Sovereign Naturally Born American Individuals. So, the entire pretext for this entire discussion starts-off on a falsehood, no matter what the US Supreme Court says.

Next the article goes on to say: "It is hard to see how establishing a level playing field for free speech – as our Founding Fathers did by making it a right under the Constitution and which the Supreme Court upheld – is a threat to our democracy". Huh? It was never supposed to be a level playing field. Only Sovereign Individuals get the rights of God, everything else is subservient. And the US Constitution was not established to grant rights, it is a document that creates LIMITED powers sufficient to protect the God Given Rights of Sovereign Americans.

Then, the article says "Under the DISCLOSE Act, certain incorporated entities would be restricted in how they can exercise their free speech rights". Well, now this is the first thing that he got right. The government does in-fact have the power to control the actions of incorporated entities that it has created via public-private partnership. However, the government never really had the power to create these incorporated entities in the first place, so it's still an odd point. But since they created them, they can certainly govern their actions. But it does sound like only "some" incorporated entities will be controlled, like those who can't hire K-street lobbyists.

Okay, it's getting more bizarre here with this one: "Bloggers will not have the same exemption provided to other media sources. Never mind that the Supreme Court’s opinion in the Citizens United case stated, “Differential treatment of media corporations and other corporations cannot be squared with the First Amendment.”" Bloggers are not necessarily incorporated entities. Typically, they are individuals and the gov't has no power to touch their God Given Right to Free Speech. So, they're playing with semantics here, trying to convince the public that Bloggers are incorporated entities that the gov't has jurisdiction over. Then they start talking about differential treatment of media corporations as compared to other corporation, which is just wild. The gov't has no req't to protect the free speech of an incorporated entity, even if that entity produces media. So, while the gov't can regulate incorporated entities, because they create them, they have no Constitutional duty to offer these entities any protections. This entire line of discussion is moot.

"For many bloggers to exercise their free speech rights, they would have to jump through the same onerous new hoops as many businesses, nonprofit groups, and even such threats to democracy as your local chamber of commerce." Yup, they're trying semantic manipulation in this article and via this bill. It starts out talking about other entities, then discusses corporations, then moves to incorporated entities, then slides-in to bloggers and businesses. Well, if a blogger or a business is not a corporation, then the gov't has no power over their Inalienable Rights, because the blogger or business is acting as a Sovereign Indivdual.

They're just praying on the publics stupidity here, and it's pretty disgusting. This should not create an ounce of fear in anyone reading this, it is designed to scare us in to self-control, because they can't legally stop us in a court of law, and the US Supreme Court still has to pretend it is holding up our most basic principles, so a case on this matter would lose in the courts. An individual's right to Free Speech is pretty well grounded in our documents, obliterating that in law would cause an uproar amongst the legal community, which still has some pretty powerful factions.

The moral of this story is don't create an incorporated business or non-profit, because they'll come after that entity. But you are, as an individual, immune to their saber rattling, no matter how loud they bang.

_________________
"For every thousand hacking at the leaves of evil, there is one striking at the root."
David Thoreau (1817-1862)
anonymously email me by clicking here
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://wwws.forummotion.com
Silent Wind



Posts : 261
Join date : 2009-10-24

PostSubject: Re: Bloggers Beware - They're Coming After You!   Sat 29 May 2010, 3:39 am

I dont want to drag off into never never land but I have done much studying and reading on some of this stuff. Sovereign Individual, I dont think any of us are this. It all pertains to legalese. Many will say that a birth certificate does in fact make one a corporation, if I am sovereign why cant I refuse one and tell them I am putting it in my bible. Now whether or not this can be proven or not, evidence leads to no. But if in fact we were sovereign individuals we would not need drivers license (which are for commercial purposes) to travel. State supreme courts have upheld that the right to travel cannot be impinged ( http://www.apfn.org/apfn/travel.htm ). Why do you get a certificate of title to your car but not the actual title? If people were in fact sovereign individuals then how can a court of law proceed in a case where fictions (corporations) battle against non fictions (sovereign ind), this is illogical. If I am court as a sovereign can I demand that the actual State of California show up? What if I decline counsel do I have to re present myself, contradiction. When one actually gets down to the wording used in court one will soon find that words have an altogether different meaning. Submit an application (bending to anothers will while begging). Understand - Stand under (Do you understand the laws I have given - Do you stand under the laws I have given).

I think you have given a very good analysis C1 but IMHO I dont think any of us are Sovereign Individuals. To me people believe the facade of sovereignty but go into a courtroom and see how much sovereignty one has. Sorry to sidetrack.

I agree with you on the saber rattling but if passed it is another step in some direction therefore bad because its another statute. More left-right noise. "The more numerous the laws, the more corrupt the government"
Back to top Go down
View user profile
ScoutsHonor



Posts : 1360
Join date : 2009-10-20

PostSubject: Re: Bloggers Beware - They're Coming After You!   Sun 30 May 2010, 11:52 am

C1 wrote:
Is this the original source for the article?

http://biggovernment.com/tprice/2010/05/27/bloggers-beware-theyre-coming-after-you/

I read that and got cross-eyed over all the convoluted arguments and vectoring.

First, it says that "The Supreme Court found that the government could not restrict the free speech rights of individuals or other entities wishing to participate in the political dialogue." But wait a minute, those "other entities" are public private partnerships, called corporations, that are a creation of the state. No state instrument has the power of Free Speech, that is reserved only for Sovereign Naturally Born American Individuals. So, the entire pretext for this entire discussion starts-off on a falsehood, no matter what the US Supreme Court says.

Next the article goes on to say: "It is hard to see how establishing a level playing field for free speech – as our Founding Fathers did by making it a right under the Constitution and which the Supreme Court upheld – is a threat to our democracy". Huh? It was never supposed to be a level playing field. Only Sovereign Individuals get the rights of God, everything else is subservient. And the US Constitution was not established to grant rights, it is a document that creates LIMITED powers sufficient to protect the God Given Rights of Sovereign Americans.

Then, the article says "Under the DISCLOSE Act, certain incorporated entities would be restricted in how they can exercise their free speech rights". Well, now this is the first thing that he got right. The government does in-fact have the power to control the actions of incorporated entities that it has created via public-private partnership. However, the government never really had the power to create these incorporated entities in the first place, so it's still an odd point. But since they created them, they can certainly govern their actions. But it does sound like only "some" incorporated entities will be controlled, like those who can't hire K-street lobbyists.

Okay, it's getting more bizarre here with this one: "Bloggers will not have the same exemption provided to other media sources. Never mind that the Supreme Court’s opinion in the Citizens United case stated, “Differential treatment of media corporations and other corporations cannot be squared with the First Amendment.”" Bloggers are not necessarily incorporated entities. Typically, they are individuals and the gov't has no power to touch their God Given Right to Free Speech. So, they're playing with semantics here, trying to convince the public that Bloggers are incorporated entities that the gov't has jurisdiction over. Then they start talking about differential treatment of media corporations as compared to other corporation, which is just wild. The gov't has no req't to protect the free speech of an incorporated entity, even if that entity produces media. So, while the gov't can regulate incorporated entities, because they create them, they have no Constitutional duty to offer these entities any protections. This entire line of discussion is moot.

"For many bloggers to exercise their free speech rights, they would have to jump through the same onerous new hoops as many businesses, nonprofit groups, and even such threats to democracy as your local chamber of commerce." Yup, they're trying semantic manipulation in this article and via this bill. It starts out talking about other entities, then discusses corporations, then moves to incorporated entities, then slides-in to bloggers and businesses. Well, if a blogger or a business is not a corporation, then the gov't has no power over their Inalienable Rights, because the blogger or business is acting as a Sovereign Indivdual.

They're just praying on the publics stupidity here, and it's pretty disgusting. This should not create an ounce of fear in anyone reading this, it is designed to scare us in to self-control, because they can't legally stop us in a court of law, and the US Supreme Court still has to pretend it is holding up our most basic principles, so a case on this matter would lose in the courts. An individual's right to Free Speech is pretty well grounded in our documents, obliterating that in law would cause an uproar amongst the legal community, which still has some pretty powerful factions.

The moral of this story is don't create an incorporated business or non-profit, because they'll come after that entity. But you are, as an individual, immune to their saber rattling, no matter how loud they bang.

Very good analysis. Thank you.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: Bloggers Beware - They're Coming After You!   

Back to top Go down
 
Bloggers Beware - They're Coming After You!
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 1 of 1
 Similar topics
-
» Banned User keeps coming back
» Sponsored content: New advertising format coming soon on Forumotion forums.
» Eric, bad weather coming your way!
» Stress driving doctors and dentists to drink addiction
» Adopted newborn coming home in about a week

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
WWWS :: Main Forums :: Domestic Affairs-
Jump to: