Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Dianne Feinstein: First Amendment Is A Special Privilege
sipsey street irregulars ^ | 10/31/13 | Dutchman6

Posted on 10/31/2013 5:57:58 PM PDT by Nachum

Here is the evil queen's actual money-quote footage from the Senate floor on who will be selected to become government "approved" reporters. Video - 3:13

Pay close attention, folks. We're standing on the ledge of Federally Issued, Press-Pass Identity Cards for "Gov't Allowed" Reporters. No others need apply.

Got a video camera, or audio recorder ? Make sure your Ausweise* is in order. (Permission to be on Reich Property)

(Excerpt) Read more at sipseystreetirregulars.blogspot.com ...


TOPICS: Conspiracy; Government
KEYWORDS: amendment; cw2; feinstein; first; privilege
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-34 next last
vid at link
1 posted on 10/31/2013 5:57:58 PM PDT by Nachum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Nachum

just proves the reset is way past due.


2 posted on 10/31/2013 5:58:59 PM PDT by Secret Agent Man (Gone Galt; Not averse to Going Bronson.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #3 Removed by Moderator

To: Nachum
Yup!..that's why it was the 1st......DUMBASS!!!

DUH!!!!!!!!!!!!!

4 posted on 10/31/2013 6:02:47 PM PDT by M-cubed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

It’s a God given right, backed up by the Second Amendment you ugly witch.


5 posted on 10/31/2013 6:03:34 PM PDT by dainbramaged (Joe McCarthy was right.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

She’s not talking about the First Amendment- she’s talking about a proposed reporter’s shield law, which would be, yes, a privilege.


6 posted on 10/31/2013 6:07:08 PM PDT by Conscience of a Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Conscience of a Conservative

A shield law is unnecessary with a First Amendment.
What don’t they understand ?


7 posted on 10/31/2013 6:08:15 PM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks ("Say Not the Struggle Naught Availeth.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Conscience of a Conservative
She’s not talking about the First Amendment- she’s talking about a proposed reporter’s shield law, which would be, yes, a privilege.

Which means that when Matt Drudge originally reported on Monica Lewinsky, he would not have been protected.

I don't like it.

8 posted on 10/31/2013 6:15:00 PM PDT by Nachum (Obamacare: It's. The. Flaw.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

Diane Feinstein might be happier in Somalia


9 posted on 10/31/2013 6:20:35 PM PDT by realcleanguy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

It is NOT a privilege! That’s why it’s an AMENDMENT! It’s a guaranteed RIGHT! What an ASS!


10 posted on 10/31/2013 6:21:54 PM PDT by FrdmLvr ("WE ARE ALL OSAMA, 0BAMA!" al-Qaeda terrorists who breached the American compound in Benghazi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

Neck.
Rope.
Tree limb.

Some assembly required.


11 posted on 10/31/2013 6:21:58 PM PDT by Flintlock ("The redcoats are coming" -- TO SEIZE OUR GUNS!!--Paul Revere)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

Well, it’s time for patriots to water the tree of liberty once again.


12 posted on 10/31/2013 6:27:25 PM PDT by Bullish (The only real solution is to abolish liberal democrats forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum
God gave to us unalienable rights, and the amendments were established in order to protect our core rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Unalienable means "given to us by God, which can cannot be given or taken away by man."

The amendments are not privileges.

A privilege is not an unalienable right.

A privilege denotes something that someone else can give or take away.

I think I would be embarrassed if I thought and spoke like Feinstein.

13 posted on 10/31/2013 6:29:02 PM PDT by Slyfox (Satan's goal is to rub out the image of God he sees in the face of every human.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: realcleanguy

“Diane Feinstein might be happier in Somalia.”
Perhaps she would be.I know for a fact that I’d be happier if she were there.


14 posted on 10/31/2013 6:31:05 PM PDT by Farmer Dean (stop worrying about what they want to do to you,start thinking about what you want to do to them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

This is crazy. Now reporters in America need to get registered. That’s what they do here in China. In Beijing all reporters are required to undergo a 2-day seminar on CCP propaganda and take a test. You then have swear allegiance to the CCP. This requirement was launched shortly after I was kicked out of the Chinese media. The running joke in China is that if you don’t get fired in the Chinese media that means you are really in an incompetent reporter. When I got fired a few Chinese editors congratulated me for proving the truth of this joke.


15 posted on 10/31/2013 6:32:33 PM PDT by TexGrill (Don't mess with Texas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: realcleanguy
Diane Feinstein might be happier in Somalia

I'd be happier if she were in Somalia.

16 posted on 10/31/2013 6:35:04 PM PDT by Cementjungle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Nachum; All
Given that the 1st Amendment prohibits Congress from making laws regulating speech and the press altogether, if Feinstein doesn't like the 1st Amendment then the Constitution's Article V requires her to do the following.

She is supposed to rally Congress to propose an amendment to the Constitution to the states which would repeal or effectively modify the 1st Amendment. And if the states chose to ratify such an amendment, highly unlikely imo, then Feinstein would be a hero.

17 posted on 10/31/2013 6:35:33 PM PDT by Amendment10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

Looks like Senator Cruz needs to give a constitutional lesson on the 1st Amendment to DiFi like he did on the 2nd.


18 posted on 10/31/2013 6:36:26 PM PDT by freedom1st
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

Yeh Di be thankful its there or your lips would have been sewn shut a long time ago.


19 posted on 10/31/2013 6:40:36 PM PDT by Georgia Girl 2 (The only purpose of a pistol is to fight your way back to the rifle you should never have dropped.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

as far as her stated words go, sounds as if she is afraid of a 17 year old with a web-blog making comments; she defines him as not a bona fide journalist. She wants look back provisions to see if the 17 year old blogger was a bona fide journalist in the past, although not presently associated with any bona fide journalism entity.

do the scrutinized by the first amendment get to define who the scrutinizers are??

a 17 year old with a web blog is fine with me

if he spews untruths, let the public domain sort that out

after all the administration spews out untruths daily

do they need a special license to do so?


20 posted on 10/31/2013 6:44:32 PM PDT by AMDG&BVMH (wE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-34 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson