Please quit perpetuating the myth that she was testifying before congress. She was not. It was a staged media event made to look like she was before congress. I know it seems petty, but it bothers me that this has somehow become accepted as the storyline.
There's a legal difference here (goes back to three sisters who couldn't sing and a newspaper panned them or something like that - the SC sided with the newspaper ... or something like that - forgotten the details.) - might be why dems are pushing the 'testifying before congress' lie. One way she's a 'public person - and we have the right to say what we want about her and her ideas - and the other way - is kine of 'maybe she is - maybe she isn't'. If she's not a public figure they can sue us - and destroy our rights...
Bloggers are a lot more innocent than some third year law student at one of the top law schools. But that won't help us much. The press wants us stripped of our 'citizen journalists' rights too. They'll be heavy into her side. If we lose our citizen rights - if they can established THEY have rights that we don't have - the right to critique public people, they'll feel they can re-establish their role as 'gatekeeper' ...
That's a big incentive for them. And it might work.
If little miss 'I want free birth control' decides to not only sue Rush - but to sue bloggers - and she wins - our ability to made comments about people in the news will be stopped. Who wants to comment if they could get sued - and lose everything?
How honest would you be about some liberal blow-hard IF you knew he could sue you and take everything you own?
If a few of us were thrown in jail and stripped of all our belongings, it wouldn't take long before all of us were silenced.
These totalitarians-in-waiting are playing hard ball - we've got to be careful. Very careful.
You're right - there are people perpetuating that myth.
There's a legal difference here (goes back to three sisters who couldn't sing and a newspaper panned them or something like that - the Supreme Court sided with the newspaper - forgotten the details - something about fair criticism and comment... ) - might be why dems are pushing the 'testifying before congress' lie. One way she's a 'public person - and we have the right to say what we want about her and her ideas - and the other way - is kine of 'maybe she is - maybe she isn't'. If she's not a public figure they can sue us - and destroy our rights...
Bloggers are a lot more innocent than some third year law student at one of the top law schools. But that won't help us much. The press wants us stripped of our 'citizen journalists' rights too. They'll be heavy into her side. If we lose our citizen rights - if they can established THEY have rights that we don't have - the right to critique public people, they'll feel they can re-establish their role as 'gatekeeper' ...
That's a big incentive for them. And it might work.
If little miss 'I want free birth control' decides to not only sue Rush - but to sue bloggers - and she wins - our ability to made comments about people in the news will be stopped. Who wants to comment if they could get sued - and lose everything?
How honest would you be about some liberal blow-hard IF you knew he could sue you and take everything you own?
If a few of us were thrown in jail and stripped of all our belongings, it wouldn't take long before all of us were silenced.
These totalitarians-in-waiting are playing hard ball - we've got to be careful. Very careful.
Ping