I have had ZERO freedoms trampled on and you cannot point to one that you have had trampled on. You can talk about a bunch of what if'sbut that is all you have.
I was however trampled upon by terrorists on 9 11 with the likes of gorelick and clinton to thank for it when it comes to policy regarding getting the lead ( or DU) out after those that wish to fight.
You can say that terrorists have the right to privacy if you want to. You can live with that action. I won't.
If you have a bona fide right trampling example then by all means take it to court.....but see you are a talker and you don't have anything to take to court or you would be posting that example and updating freepers with the progress you are making agsint your arch enemy Geroge W Bush......
Give it up. Really.
I absolutely give up on you.
The most imminent danger comes from campaign-finance rules, especially those spawned by the 2002 McCain-Feingold Campaign Reform Act. Republican maverick John McCains co-sponsorship aside, the bill passed only because of overwhelming Dem support. Its easy to see why liberals have spearheaded the nations three-decade experiment with campaign-finance regulation.
Seeking to rid politics of big-money corruption, election-law reforms obstruct the kinds of political speechpolitical ads and perhaps now the feisty editorializing of the new mediathat escape the filter of the mainstream press and the academy, left-wing fiefdoms still regulation-free. Campaign-finance reform, notes columnist George Will, by steadily expanding governments control of the political campaigns that decide who controls government, advances liberalisms program of extending government supervision of life.
The irony of campaign-finance reform is that the corruption it targets seems not to exist in any widespread sense. Studies galore have found little or no significant influence of campaign contributions on legislators votes. Ideological commitments, party positions, and constituents wishes are what motivate the typical politicians actions in office. Aha! reformers will often riposte, the corruption is hidden, determining what Congress doesnt dolike enacting big gas taxes. But as Will notes, that charge is impossible to refute by disproving a negative.
Even so, such conspiracy-theory thinking is transforming election law into what journalist Jonathan Rauch calls an engine of unlimited political regulation.
McCain-Feingold, the latest and scariest step down that slope, makes it a felony for corporations, nonprofit advocacy groups, and labor unions to run ads that criticizeor even name or showmembers of Congress within 60 days of a federal election, when such quintessentially political speech might actually persuade voters.
It forbids political parties from soliciting or spending soft money contributions to publicize the principles and ideas they stand for. Amending the already baffling campaign-finance rules from the seventies, McCain-Feingolds dizzying dos and donts, its detailed and onerous reporting requirements of funding sourceswhich require a dense 300-page book to lay outhave made running for office, contributing to a candidate or cause, or advocating without an attorney at hand unwise and potentially ruinous.
Not for nothing has Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas denounced McCain-Feingolds unprecedented restrictions as an assault on the free exchange of ideas.
http://www.city-journal.org/html/16_1_rush_oreilly.html