***Supreme Court Eliminates 1st Amendment Rights: America Died Today***

Stardate: 0312.10

[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.

[browsin]

I think they were after a level playing field,as too was Marx.The difference being that Marx would not accept that at the end of the game there would be a winner.

[Veracious Poet]

The Bill of Rights has been dead since 1933...they're slowly but surely making it official.

You have no "rights" other than privileges accorded your by the nanny-state.

[ex-snook]

"the USSC must go..... "

Review the bidding. Wasn't this law passed by the GOP Congress and signed by Bush? They should go first.

[Trampled by Lambs]

I suppose I am ignorant but I don't see how this is the blow to free speech that some here say it is. Anyone care to briefly explain?

[Sam Cree]

We can rename ourselves the United Socialist States of America, I guess.

"The compelling interest of the state" now rules.

[Always Right]

this is not about reporting the event, this is reaction to what has just happened in what used to be America....

The Supreme Court just upheld McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform which prohibits free speech 60 days prior to an election.

[Walkingfeather]

have you ever heard of a constitutional amendment....? They are tough to pass but I think this one would. Let's go that route before you start breaking out the torches and pitch forks.

[Always Right]

I suppose I am ignorant but I don't see how this is the blow to free speech that some here say it is. Anyone care to briefly explain?

Do you think it is OK to prohibit negative campaign ads 60 days prior to an election?

[Sam Cree]

Do you think grass roots groups of citizens should be allowed to get together and buy advertising, to make their views on political issues known?

No longer legal in the U.S. of A.

[Always Right]

have you ever heard of a constitutional amendment....? They are tough to pass but I think this one would. Let's go that route before you start breaking out the torches and pitch forks.

I don't see how we could make an amendment any clearer than the one we already have.

[Digger]

I remember all of these replies in the past who said again how smart GW was to let it go & the courts would adjust it. You have no one to blame but your so-called conservative CEO who has sold ALL conservatives out. Remember this is the "Two-Party Cartel" & remember as long as you vote in it this is the crapola you will get. WE NEED TO VOTE FOR A 3RD PARTY & GET THESE TRAITORS/POLS OUT. They are bought & paid for by the elites, which have none of our values at stake.

[Sam Cree]

"Let's go that route before you start breaking out the torches and pitch forks."

Well, since the same Supreme Court let stand a ruling that the 2nd Amendment is not directed at individuals (as if the Bill of Rights included rights for the government over the people), don't count on pitch fork possession being allowed.

[BigSkyFreeper]

I'd rather my eyes, ears and thought process restricted media, press or speech. Not 9 or 5 Justices or 535 members of Congress. I knew sooner or later we'd come to this point that rights would be infringed or abridged. CFR should have been a wake up call to anyone. I will admit it was all over my head when I first heard about CFR years ago, I tried my best to learn about all the ramifications and all the scenarios if CFR was actually enacted. I mean, why should government stop there? If we lay on our collective backs, the entire Constitution will be shredded right before our very eyes.

[Rad_J]

What this means along with the Sodomy ruling is that we the people are supposed to shut up and take it up the @ss.

[freeeee]

have you ever heard of a constitutional amendment....?

Great idea! We could make one that says "Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech..."

What could possibly go wrong?

[Always Right]

Here's Justice Scalia first paragraph from his dissent:

This is a sad day for the freedom of speech. Who could have imagined that the same Court which, within the past four years, has sternly disapproved of restrictions upon such inconsequential forms of expression as virtual child pornography, Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition, 535 U. S. 234 (2002), tobacco advertising, Lorillard Tobacco Co. v. Reilly, 533 U. S. 525 (2001), dissemination of illegally intercepted communications, Bartnicki v. Vopper, 532 U. S. 514 (2001), and sexually explicit cable programming, United States v. Playboy Entertainment Group, Inc., 529 U. S. 803 (2000), would smile with favor upon a law that cuts to the heart of what the First Amendment is meant to protect: the right to criticize the government. For that is what the most offensive provisions of this legislation are all about. We are governed by Congress, and this legislation prohib- its the criticism of Members of Congress by those entities most capable of giving such criticism loud voice: national political parties and corporations, both of the commercial and the not-for-profit sort. It forbids pre-election criticism of incumbents by corporations, even not-for-profit corporations, by use of their general funds; and forbids national party use of “soft” money to fund “issue ads” that incumbents find so offensive.

[Always Right]

What this means along with the Sodomy ruling is that we the people are supposed to shut up and take it up the @ss.

LOL, way to tie together the 'logic' of our beloved Court.

[BigSkyFreeper]

OK, so President Bush signs the Campaign Finance law in the dead of night last night, even though it contained items in there he specifically campaigned against and didn't want included in there.

Way to go Bonzo. /sarcasm

[Tribune7]

RIP America...call the boys and girls home from Iraq....they ain't fighting for freedom any more....

We aren't dead and only a whipped dog would say so. We have a fight on our hands. The most important of which is the courts.

Bush and the GOP have a whole lot to blame for this, but the smart thing is not to turn against them --unless the Dems by some miracle which will not happen start defending the Constitution.

Nor is it to sulk and stay home.

Get mad and fight.

[Happy2BMe]

The next step in denying God's sovereignty over the United States will go to these nine people . .

"The question is or at least ought to be, how can such a small, godless, minority have such influence over our courts and legislative processes?"

Answer:

U.S. Supreme Court, 2003 - The Oligarchy*

(All Your Sovereignty Are Belong To Us!)

Back Row (left to right): Ginsburg, Souter, Thomas, Breyer
Front Row (left to right): Scalia, Stevens, Rehnquist, O'Connor, Kennedy

ol•i•gar•chy
Pronunciation: 'ä-l&-"gär-kE, 'O-
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -chies
Date: 1542
1 : government by the few
2 : a government in which a small group exercises control especially for corrupt and selfish purposes; also : a group exercising such control
3 : an organization under oligarchic control

sov•er•eign•ty
Variant(s): also sov•ran•ty /-tE/
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -ties
Etymology: Middle English soverainte, from Middle French soveraineté, from Old French, from soverain
Date: 14th century
1 obsolete : supreme excellence or an example of it
2 a : supreme power especially over a body politic b : freedom from external control : AUTONOMY c : controlling influence
3 : one that is SOVEREIGN; especially : an autonomous state