Monday, November 2, 2008
Obama v. The Constitution
If you happen to be fond of the Bill of Rights, as I am, the following is scary. To keep it simple (and from being ridiculously long), I'll stick with my 2 favorite Amendments: the 1st and 2nd.
I find it ironic that the party that claims to be the champion of "freedom of speech" are the same ones that scream "racism" whenever someone questions Obama. I find it frightening that we are leaning closer and closer to having a Democratic Congress, Democratic President and a Liberal media. Where are we going to learn about contraversial issues? Or will they just be hushed under new incarnations of the "Fairness Doctrine"? Are we looking at the Sedition Acts again?
1st Amendment:
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=29263
Excerpt:
The FCC has sent letters to some of the nation's most prominent military analysts -- some of them pro-President Bush and pro-war -- suggesting they may have broken the law when they appeared on television stations to comment on and explain the war on terrorism.
Also, see my previous blog regarding the Fairness Doctrine.
2nd Amendment:
As many will (should) recall, over this summer, our Supreme Court ruled that the 2nd Amendment DOES give Americans the right to own guns. I am a gun owner. I own one for several reasons, one being because I like the idea of excercising my Constitutional rights. I also believe in being able to defend myself. Have I had to shoot an intruder at my home? No, but believe me, I would not hesitate to do so. "Oh, guns cause crime" is the cry of so many anti-gun (or, anti-Constitution) activists. Do you really believe that your local criminal is going to the local gun store to have a background check run and purchase his traceable firearm before committing a crime? Do you think that taking guns away from people who purchase(d) them legally is going to stop criminals from using guns? I'd prefer not to be forced to be a victim. I prefer the option to defend myself.
ON GUN RIGHTS (from a NRA sponsored site):
• Obama voted to ban hundreds of rifles and shotguns commonly used for hunting and sport shooting
Illinois Senate, SB 1195, 3/13/03
• Obama endorsed a ban on all handguns
Independent Voters of Illinois/Independent Precinct Organization general candidate questionnaire, 9/9/96, Politico, 03/31/08
• Obama voted to allow the prosecution of people who use a firearm for self-defense in their homes
Illinois Senate, S.B. 2165, vote 20, 3/25/04
• Obama supported increasing taxes on firearms and ammunition by 500 percent
Chicago Defender, 12/13/99
• Obama voted to ban almost all rifle ammunition commonly used for hunting and sport shooting
United States Senate, S. 397, vote 217, 7/29/05
• Obama opposes Right-to-Carry laws
Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, 4/2/08, Chicago Tribune, 9/15/04
Showing posts with label FCC. Show all posts
Showing posts with label FCC. Show all posts
Friday, January 9, 2009
Fairness Doctrine as a blatant attack on the First Amendment
October, 2008
(Thanks to www.glennbeck.com for the image)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairness_Doctrine
http://www.museum.tv/archives/etv/F/htmlF/fairnessdoct/fairnessdoct.htm
http://www.businessandmedia.org/printer/2008/20080812160747.aspx
http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/06/the_fairness_doctrine_at_work.html
The ideology that claims to champion Freedom of Speech beliefs, modern liberals, are leaning toward waging a direct attack on our 1st Amendement rights. (The First Amendment happens to be my favorite, followed by the 2nd... though it is hard to put an "order of preference" on such vital items)
In a new form of this frightening media control, it could expand to the web, including political blogs. So, would that mean that I (as in, me, personally) would have to give those I may "rant" about or attack in my little ol' MySpace blog the opportunity to respond? Obviously, writings like mine are probably not the top of the target list (considering my readership isn't THAT high), but the theoretically possibility and threat are scary!
Ok, so a great deal of talk radio is conservative (does it scare liberals that much for there to be dialogue about contraversial issues?).
A lot of entertainment/pop culture type shows are obviously liberal.
In general, our media tends to be liberal. It is just the way our media has gone.
Unfortunate as it may be that we can't have unbiased news, media, etc, governmental regulation of discussion of contraverisal issues (and which sides are revealed) is just unconstitutional.
If you don't like what the media is telling you, you have the right to CHANGE THE STATION! There are so many sources of media, I promise you, you can find something that appeals to your ideals.
Note in the stories cited above that there is evidence that shows that while the Fairness Doctrine was in place, media outlets were hesitant to even bring up contraversial issues as they did not want to risk getting hit by the FCC. How frightening is that? So, as Americans, we would lose our ability to discuss in a public forum contraversial issues tied to government and politics?
There are current rules regarding equal time (not part of this discussion).
I always find it amusing that the conservatives (who want SMALLER government) are constantly accused of fascism, Nazi-ism, etc... but liberals attempt to control our air conditioners, conversations and lives...
(Thanks to www.glennbeck.com for the image)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairness_Doctrine
http://www.museum.tv/archives/etv/F/htmlF/fairnessdoct/fairnessdoct.htm
http://www.businessandmedia.org/printer/2008/20080812160747.aspx
http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/06/the_fairness_doctrine_at_work.html
The ideology that claims to champion Freedom of Speech beliefs, modern liberals, are leaning toward waging a direct attack on our 1st Amendement rights. (The First Amendment happens to be my favorite, followed by the 2nd... though it is hard to put an "order of preference" on such vital items)
In a new form of this frightening media control, it could expand to the web, including political blogs. So, would that mean that I (as in, me, personally) would have to give those I may "rant" about or attack in my little ol' MySpace blog the opportunity to respond? Obviously, writings like mine are probably not the top of the target list (considering my readership isn't THAT high), but the theoretically possibility and threat are scary!
Ok, so a great deal of talk radio is conservative (does it scare liberals that much for there to be dialogue about contraversial issues?).
A lot of entertainment/pop culture type shows are obviously liberal.
In general, our media tends to be liberal. It is just the way our media has gone.
Unfortunate as it may be that we can't have unbiased news, media, etc, governmental regulation of discussion of contraverisal issues (and which sides are revealed) is just unconstitutional.
If you don't like what the media is telling you, you have the right to CHANGE THE STATION! There are so many sources of media, I promise you, you can find something that appeals to your ideals.
Note in the stories cited above that there is evidence that shows that while the Fairness Doctrine was in place, media outlets were hesitant to even bring up contraversial issues as they did not want to risk getting hit by the FCC. How frightening is that? So, as Americans, we would lose our ability to discuss in a public forum contraversial issues tied to government and politics?
There are current rules regarding equal time (not part of this discussion).
I always find it amusing that the conservatives (who want SMALLER government) are constantly accused of fascism, Nazi-ism, etc... but liberals attempt to control our air conditioners, conversations and lives...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
