Posted on 05/31/2014 8:20:03 PM PDT by lbryce
OBAMA’S REICHSTAG FIRE MOMENT TAKES THE STAGE
Sen. Ted Cruz dropped a bombshell, as you will see in this video, where he emphatically states that the United States Senate this year will vote on a Constitutional amendment to effectively repeal the First Amendment. This is Senate Joint Resolution 19 that Se. Cruz is referring to. It proposes an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relating to contributions and expenditures intended to affect elections.
Cruz: Obama To Repeal The First Amendment from Now The End Begins on Vimeo.
This vote will give the Congress the plenary power and unlimited authority to regulate political speech. The door that they plan on using revolves around campaign finance reform, but will extend to all areas of political speech across the board.
“When you think it can’t get any worse, it does,” Cruz said. “This year, I’m sorry to tell you, the United States Senate is going to be voting on a constitutional amendment to repeal the First Amendment.”
“I am telling you — I am not making this up. Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) has announced the Senate Democrats are scheduling a vote on a constitutional amendment to give Congress the authority to regulate political speech because elected officials have decided they don’t like it when the citizenry has the temerity to criticize what they’ve done,” he added.
(Excerpt) Read more at nowtheendbegins.com ...
Cool! Thanks for letting us know so we can rest easy.
Far too lenient. Traitorobama and the Demonrats need to be indicted, tried, convicted, sentenced, and then hanged.
You can rest easy because 41 senators is not enough to meet the two-thirds threshold. Even 66 senators would not be enough. The Framers set the bar very high.
There is a detailed process in order to amend the constitution. It will not pass the states.
Cruz was reasonably giving the wrong impression that the Senate can amend the Constitution. ...
*****************************************
IMO, Cruz wasn’t talking about a bill to actually change the First Amendment.
He is saying that Shumer’s bill relative to campaign finance reform will contain limitations on political speech, which would be a violation of the Freedom of Speech.
I think most commenters on this thread just saw the reference to an Amendment and misunderstood what Cruz meant.
That's what the Second Amendment is for.
According to govtrack.us there is a 12% chance of it actually passing.
It takes 2/3 support of both Houses of Congress to propose an amendment to the Constitution to the states. And I don't hear the RINO-controlled House making the same noise. So Senate Democrats along with Cruz are blowing scorching hot air, the Democrats likely politicking for 2014, Cruz probably trying to position himself for 2016.
Excuse me while I head back to the couch and TV.
“Good news is we all have guns and no idea what to do with them.”
Ha!
Thanks, all y’all for those posts on how the amendment process is done!
More at
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3162286/posts?page=29#29
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3162286/posts?page=33#33
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3162286/posts?page=38#38
Good one by Publius:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3162286/posts?page=43#43
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3162286/posts?page=59#59
A good way to gauge their understanding is to assert that the War on Drugs is not valid — there's so much constitutionally wrong with the WOD that it's amusing to watch them try to justify it.
and he’s planning on staying in the Oval Office for many more years, this is the first step
It would get very ugly and I seriously doubt our good men and women in uniform would do much to protect an unconstitutional thug. His sorry ass will be moving out. Anyone that thinks otherwise is wrong.
The amendment seems innocuous. It seems to address only campaign finance when in fact its effect has a much larger range. Senator Cruz is drawing attention to this fact and I heartily approve.
“I know this is a stupid question, but don’t Constitutional Amendments have to be ratified by two-thirds majority of the states?”
I had the same question. Our Constitution was written in such a way as to make sure that neither the Senate or the House had sole power of the law.
True. There is no chance of this Amendment passing the Senate, much less reaching the House.
However, I find it threatening that the Democrat party and 41 Senators can find it within themselves to vote for such a travesty. The only rational reasons are to a.) appease their demented leader (Reid, in this case) and b.) appease their seething base.
All of which suggests that there is significant minority of Americans who favor control and suppression of speech -- if found offensive (to them). And there is a significant minority of politicians in the country who are prepared to give them what they want.
This is not a healthy situation...
Yeah. Since prolly all 41 are DEMS ...
Don’t kid yourself. Pimping is the nature of the business no matter what side of the aisle you’re on.
41 that are willing to state their support. How many more would vote for it who have currently declined to show their intentions?
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.