Skip to comments.
***Supreme Court Eliminates 1st Amendment Rights: America Died Today***
Stardate: 0312.10
Posted on 12/10/2003 9:22:14 AM PST by The Wizard
In a move that will eliminate the 1st amendment protections of free speach was just announced.....
America, established by the the Founding Fathers in 1776, has ended.
TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society
KEYWORDS: bushscotuscfr; freespeech; oligarchy; supremecourt
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120, 121-140, 141-160 ... 201-210 next last
To: Captain Kirk
Politics is Politics, the SC is to be above this.
To: skeeter; JohnHuang2
So the Supreme Court thinks buggery & abortion are guaranteed rights, but freedom of political speech isn't.My pick for "Quote of the Day"!
FMCDH
122
posted on
12/10/2003 11:03:40 AM PST
by
nothingnew
(The pendulum is swinging and the Rats are in the pit!)
To: nickcarraway
President Bush campaigned against this law, and he shouldn't have signed it, when it passed, no matter what the political repurcussions were.
And I don't know what is worse the fact that he signed whn he campaigned against it or the stupidity involved in thinking this was a burning political issue that would gain him favor with the voters
Maybe John Huang 2 and the rest of the supporters of his signing this garbage can give us a reprise of their logic
123
posted on
12/10/2003 11:06:09 AM PST
by
uncbob
To: uncbob
This is not going to gain favor with voters. No poll ever showed that U.S. voters cared about this at all. Quite the opposite. But the media cared about it.
124
posted on
12/10/2003 11:09:26 AM PST
by
nickcarraway
(www.terrisfight.org)
To: Tribune7
I believe Dubya is willing to appoint such people.. Why? Is it wishful thinking?
125
posted on
12/10/2003 11:10:28 AM PST
by
Durus
To: Foxy Loxy
So, you believe it is OK for government to restrict citizens from banding together and pooling resources to purchase political advertising?
126
posted on
12/10/2003 11:21:46 AM PST
by
Sam Cree
(democrats are herd animals)
To: zook
"Sometimes such an admission can pay off" I wish politicians could have enough integrity to just be completely honest. GW is the straightest shooter we've had in awhile, but I'm still not expecting such an admission from him. We'll see what he says, though.
127
posted on
12/10/2003 11:24:27 AM PST
by
Sam Cree
(democrats are herd animals)
To: KarlInOhio
Rehnquist, Scalia, Kennedy and Thomas are the ones who have actually read the Constitution.
Outstanding post!
128
posted on
12/10/2003 11:37:44 AM PST
by
BSunday
(Libs, libs, everywhere, but not a brain to pick)
To: archy
reference #40.
To: Prime Choice
Yeah, well don't expect me to get too worked up. All these people whining that the First Amendment is dead are still able to say, write and print whatever they want. If their concerns were even remotely real, they wouldn't even be able to voice these concerns. BTW the best way to take away someone's rights, is little by very little, not all at once.
130
posted on
12/10/2003 11:41:58 AM PST
by
BSunday
(Libs, libs, everywhere, but not a brain to pick)
To: Always Right
Do you think it is OK to prohibit negative campaign ads 60 days prior to an election?And you know just whom will determine what "negative" means. Why, the government, of course.
Cordially,
131
posted on
12/10/2003 11:45:18 AM PST
by
Diamond
To: Straight Pipes
sure, you still have your freedom of speech, to stand on a soapbox or send an email that will be deleted by a spam filter, or a bulk mailing that will get torn up with the rest of the junk mail. in the meantime, the NYT and the big media have the real free speech, the only one that counts, that can be used to change minds and influence people.
To: Prime Choice
I am so sick of all these people who are ONLY NOW discovering that our rights are under attack. Where the hell were you people 40 years ago?? Similar thoughts are passing through my mind.
133
posted on
12/10/2003 11:51:30 AM PST
by
backhoe
(--30--)
To: zook
Finally, if Bush can play the hand right, this may actually work to his advantage as a campaign issue. He can argue that he signed the legislation expecting that a rational Supreme Court would toss out the objectionable parts, but that a group of predominantly liberal-left justices voted to take away Americans' free speech rights. That is intellectually dishonest in the extreme! I could not imagine anyone saying that. EACH BRANCH and EVERY PERSON IN THE GOVERNMENT has a SWORN DUTY to UPHOLD THE CONSTITUTION. If Bush thought it was unconstitutional he needed to Veto it, it is part of his job. He took an OATH to "uphold the Constitution" and vetoing legislation that he considers unconstitutional is clearly a part of the checks and balances designed in to safegard the Constitution. One of the WORST trends leading to our serfdom.
To: BSunday
BTW the best way to take away someone's rights, is little by very little, not all at once. That's why it's often referred to as a Frog Boil.
(For those not familiar with the practice of frog boiling: what you do is put the frogs in a pot filled with room-temperature water. They won't put up a fight. Then you put the pot on a fire and gradually raise the heat. The frogs won't notice and still won't put up a fight. Soon enough, the water temperature will rise to a fatal level for the frogs. Because the temperature increases are so gradual, the frogs never notice...until it's too late. Then the frogs are dead and never know what hit them.)
135
posted on
12/10/2003 12:02:33 PM PST
by
Prime Choice
(Leftist opinions may be free, but I still feel like I'm getting ripped off every time I receive one.)
To: oceanview; MeeknMing; PhilDragoo; potlatch; Ragtime Cowgirl; Alamo-Girl; dixiechick2000; ...
Time for selective boycotts of major network TV and lib newspapers.
Pick one network; CBS being the worst; delete it on your TV/VCR/DVD programming.
Cancel all NYT, WP, LAT, etc. newspapers.
FR has over 100,000 members and millions of surfers.
NRA has over 4,000,000 members and the USA has over 90,000,000 gun owners.
Republican, Democrat, or Independent, or Libertarian; lets turn off their money machines today and forever!
136
posted on
12/10/2003 12:03:37 PM PST
by
autoresponder
(<html> <center> <img src="http://0access.web1000.com/HV.gif"> </center> </html> HILLARY SHOOTS!)
To: Durus
I believe Dubya is willing to appoint such people.. Why? Is it wishful thinking? It's not negative thinking. The people he has nominated have been opposed by people who have historically treated our Constitution as something not to be taken seriously.
Now, other than staying home, or protest voting or voting for Howard Dean, what do you suggest be done next November?
137
posted on
12/10/2003 12:04:53 PM PST
by
Tribune7
(David Limbaugh never said his brother had a "nose like a vacuum cleaner")
To: Jack Black
GWB should have vetoed this piece of crap
138
posted on
12/10/2003 12:05:12 PM PST
by
The Wizard
(Saddamocrats are enemies of America, treasonous everytime they speak)
To: Always Right
JUSTICE SOUTER, JUSTICE GINSBURG, and JUSTICE BREYER JUSTICE STEVENS, JUSTICE O'CONNOR SOUTER -- appointed by G.H. W. Bush.
STEVENS -- appointed by Gerald Ford
O'CONNOR -- appointed by Reagan.
This is a victory for Republicans everywhere.
139
posted on
12/10/2003 12:08:12 PM PST
by
Sloth
("I feel like I'm taking crazy pills!" -- Jacobim Mugatu, 'Zoolander')
To: zook
Second, knock off the Bush bashing. Yep, in hindsight he shouldn't have signed it. But like nearly everyone else with a clear head he never dreamed the SC would uphold any ad ban.... You have an interesting definition of being clear-headed.
Finally, if Bush can play the hand right, this may actually work to his advantage as a campaign issue. He can argue that he signed the legislation expecting that a rational Supreme Court would toss out the objectionable parts, but that a group of predominantly liberal-left justices voted to take away Americans' free speech rights.
Why do bills go before the President for veto or signature?
140
posted on
12/10/2003 12:12:08 PM PST
by
Sloth
("I feel like I'm taking crazy pills!" -- Jacobim Mugatu, 'Zoolander')
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120, 121-140, 141-160 ... 201-210 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson