Supreme Court Takes Knife to First Amendment

Rush Limbaugh ^ | December 10, 2003 | Rush Limbaugh

[ovrtaxt]

The question now is: "Can a candidate be sodomized 60 days before a general election."

Well, apparently the American People can be.

[backhoe]

BTW, how many times since yesterday have you read the words "Chicken Little" or "sky is falling", in response to people's outrage over this ruling?

Rather a lot... but alarmism aside, this is not a good time for free speech in America. I guess we'll get it sorted out eventually, but it would have been better had it never come to pass.

I tend to view it as a manifestation of the "last gasp of the Establishment Media"-- it was never a popular idea with voters, but the press promoted CFR madly, under their general-purpose panic mantra "We Gotta Do Something About This!"

I suspect that like with Prohibition, creative Americans will find a way to dodge around it... like, maybe, the offshore Pirate Radio station "Radio Free America..."

[joesbucks]

I in general support CFR but not in the convoluted form it took on. That said, I saw rabid Bush supporter after Bush supporter report and flame that he did the politically correct thing by signing it and allowing the supremes to judge it unconsititutional. They fawned he knew what he was doing. That's after initially saying he (Bush) would veto any CFR legislation.

Let's see, which previous president did we say flip flopped and signed legislation that was bringing down this country before this one? Which president before this one did we say was unworthy of office because of such actions?

Where is our march on Washington?

[Right_in_Virginia]

That person who has been trashed cannot respond on television, can't buy a commercial, can't get a commercial run, can't do it. Got to be invited by the press to come on and counter.

I'm not sure this is true. Ads can run in this 30/60 day period. The money to fund the ad cannot be unregulated (above the hard money limits) or from incorporated organizations.

But, the RNC can respond to ABCNBCCBSCNN. (Heck, the media has been lopsided in favor of the Dimms for decades.)

The candidates' names can't be mentioned, but, as I understand this, there's no restriction on taking an ad to blast a Tim Russert interview or Peter Jennings "special".

This law is awful. But, it's here.

I hope minds sharper than mine are prepared to find and use the loopholes. We've got an election to win.

[raybbr]

We've got an election to win.

What's with the we? There is only one party now. The party of politicians.

[hellinahandcart]

Kind of hard to blast am incumbent's voting record if you can't mention his name or show his face, isn't it?

How nice for the bastards.

[Right_in_Virginia]

Kind of hard to blast am incumbent's voting record if you can't mention his name or show his face, isn't it?

Yes, it is. It's also unbelievable.

We need a coordinated grassroots uprising to repeal this law and add retroactive mandatory Congressional term limits.

[palmer]

..."However, the bill does have flaws. Certain provisions present serious constitutional concerns. In particular, H.R. 2356 goes farther than I originally proposed by preventing all individuals, not just unions and corporations, from making donations to political parties in connection with federal elections. I believe individual freedom to participate in elections should be expanded, not diminished; and when individual freedoms are restricted, questions arise under the First Amendment.

"I also have reservations about the constitutionality of the broad ban on issue advertising, which restrains the speech of a wide variety of groups on issues of public import in the months closest to an election. I expect that the courts will resolve these legitimate legal questions as appropriate under the law...

From President Bush's written statement upon signing the CFR bill.

[thesummerwind]

And who is - I think it was Kennedy who said, "Yeah, we must look at international law."

---wasn't that O'Connor?

[thesummerwind]

Thos soft-minded, Sandra 'In The Dark' O'Connor --

[thesummerwind]

I was personally thinking that the next airliner hijack should crash into a joint session of Congress - in one fell swoop we rid ourselves of the Rats, the RINOs, the SCOTUS, and a whole pi$$pot full of career socialist bureaucrats.

No joke. That might be the only way to straighten out this country.

[Dead Corpse]

How about the SAS march in DC. Get a few thousand people to just waltz into Congress, sit down, and not let the Congress critters into the building? Do it all peaceful like, until they decide they want to call in the gendarmes.

[thesummerwind]

Silence, America!:

I must tell you, backhoe, I had a father and a mother who comitted suicide, 16 years apart.

If I didn't know better, this Court decision would really make me want to follow them. I can't describe my feelings, maybe utter impotence would be a start! I really feel that the country I knew back in the late 40's and 50's is gone, but I am sure that this has been a gradual process.

[thesummerwind]

Do it all peaceful like, until they decide they want to call in the gendarmes.

Now that is an excellent idea.

[sport]

One omer reason to keep Second Amend,ent issues out of the Supreme Court.

The people on there now will abolish the Second amendment.

If that happen, privately Congress will applaud and publically will do nothing.

[Dead Corpse]

It's been brought up here numerous times before. No one has had the guts to do it yet.

Probably NEVER will either.

[Beck_isright]

"I suspect that like with Prohibition, creative Americans will find a way to dodge around it... like, maybe, the offshore Pirate Radio station "Radio Free America..."

Sadly, they would find a way to take that station down. Just as they have voided the low power community radio law by refusing to process lisence requests. Free speech is no longer that. It's for sale to the highest bidder.

[sport]

You are correct and also it does not mean the National Guard.

It means every citizen with good character.

But that was when there were citizens.

The citizens have long since traded their freedom for free government money and the government chins and shackles that go with it and have thus become "civillians".

The difference between a citizen and civillian:

1. Citizens have rights given to them by Almighty God and protected and preserved by law.
Civillians have privileges given and taken by governmental whim.
2.Citizens are part of the government even though they have other occuptions.Citizens also have leaders [they may be elected] The leaders they elect do not fear them.Citizens are equal tp the people they instillto lead them. Example: the old common law Hue and cry: In othr words, the entire village pursued the thief.
Civillians have professional politicians. The politicans are superior to the civillains, especially in the minds of the media and the politicans. Civillians have every aspect of their life regulated by government bureaucrats from the house they are allowed to build to the time that they can use the bathroom. The civillians are feared and held in the basest of contempt by the politicians.

I will conclude with:

Citizens can also do the one thing that distinguishes a free individual from a slave. Own and possess arms personally, not through a policeman.

How does the United States compare to the above?

[sport]

Unfortunately, the vast majority Of americans are content if they can only have sports, beer, and sex. Kinda like cows in a pasture being fattened up for the slaughter.

[DManA]

Since Justices personally decide the shape of our goverment ( not our Constitution ) picking 5 justices is exactly the same electing a new government in a parliamentary system. I expect the selection of new justices to turn bloody. Will make Borking look like a walk in the park.