(from The San Antonio Express News, courtesy of Live from the Alamo)
We have advocated in the past for universal background checks and an assault weapon ban. Incompatible with the Second Amendment? Not if the concept of “guns in the wrong hands” has any meaning.
I had a thought upon reading this. What if we promoted universal background checks for anyone who wished to establish religion and freely exercise it, or speak freely, or publish, or peaceably assemble or petition the government for redress of grievances? And ban certain kinds of rapid dissemination of published material. Incompatible with the First Amendment?
After all, isn’t there a concept of “words in the wrong hands”?
How far do you think we’d get? Questioning the inviolability of The First Amendment? We’d be tarred and feathered and pilloried and spat upon and run out of town on a rail. Then hanged, drawn and quartered and the pieces arrested!
Of course there are “common sense” controls on The First Amendment! Laws against libel/slander, inciting riots, yelling fire in a crowded theatre. And there already are “common sense” controls on The Second Amendment. Laws against armed robbery, armed rape, armed mayhem, armed murder.
Mr, President, Mr. Blumberg, and Mr. King – leave me and my rights alone! If I do something wrong, arrest me.
David Codrea poses the question…
THIS because Christian chaplains have been threatened with penalties if they perform their functions under military color-of-authority. Because of the government ‘shutdown’, e.g. 15% of the federal government.
Of course, word has come out that agents of the government are to make the shutdown ‘as painful as possible’ for the regular folk. Because someone didn’t get his way.
Because someone in charge is a petulant child.
Mr. Codrea and I want to know.
AND, he states further: What do you think the jihadists will want to do if the answer is “Yes”?
Inquiring minds want to know…
I’m not a fan (nor a regular reader) of the Huffington Post, any more than I am of ‘public’ television or NPR.(No, that’s not true – I dislike HuffPO more, for their outright bombast) At least NPR tries to have the ‘cosmetic appearance’ of centricity.
Give Me Liberty linked to a HuffPo stat-fest, showing how drug overdoses and traffic accidents accounted for more deaths statistically than firearms!
Now most readers of this blog (all two of you) knew this, but my point is this comes from the Huffington Post!
Does this mean they’re preparing an opinion piece about severely restricting drug access and use or driving?
I kinda doubt it.
But, it IS good to see.
…and vice versa. (!)
Why aren’t we seeing this trumpeted in the MSM? Inquiring minds want to know.
||By Ali Al Sharnoby (Bio and Archives) Monday, August 19, 2013
Comments | Print friendly | Subscribe | Email Us
I generally do not approve of simplistic thinking. Of course, some things are black and white, e.g. good versus evil, but the question is in the nuance: What IS Good and what IS Evil?
Ay, there’s the rub.
I personally believe that not all Muslims are evil, or hold to Islamofascist views, any more than all Christians believe in stoning adulterers, gays and witches. Muslims are not all Osama and Christians are not all The Church Lady. How’s THAT for simplistic?
But, you’d never seen that in our media. In a weird twist, Islamofascists (the Fort Hood mass murderer, for example) is portrayed as workplace violence, and Christians are portrayed as violent, small-minded, bigoted, all hateful of those not members of their specific brand of religion. Religion pretty much takes it on the chin, except Islam. That’s off the table.
I think the one example I’ve seen on mainstream commercial television NOT doing this is Blue Bloods (not a news or opinion show), which shows an Irish Catholic family celebrating regular Sunday dinners after church. No making fun of Catholics or other Christians, and even bringing in other religious cultures. The family business happens to be policing. And Tom Selleck is always good.
I’m not saying we shouldn’t question or even occasionally lampoon. But let’s be even-handed and factual in so doing.
And news should be just that – facts regarding that which is new.
Sundance reports in The Last Refuge that CNN is the official paid party arm of the Administration’s disinformation!
As it says in the article, authored by it’s own reporters:
~This is not a matter of opinion, the CNN stories are documented, attributed and cited. They are factual. Everything is verifiable within the embedded links and citations.~
~The central issue is Media Controlled by The Obama Administration, and more specifically CNN – as a VERIFIED tool for propaganda and disinformation.~
They are being paid by the government to report what they want us to see and redact those things they’d rather we not see. (As some suspected all along).
Quelle surprise? Only in that’s is so direct.
Please go and read the whole article. Then take a moment to vomit and compose yourself. I hear people gripe about Fox News editorial content all the time – which of course isn’t news – but CNN is held up as the gold standard (at least in the minds of those who dislike Fox!)
Pravda on the Chattahoochee - THIS is CNN
OpenMarket.org advises us of yet another behind the scenes move by the current administration to control more stuff.
This time it’s blogging…
by HANS BADER
Can websites be forced to change to accommodate the disabled — by using “simpler language” to appeal to the “intellectually disabled,” or by making them accessible to the blind and deaf at considerable expense?
The key passage:
But now, the Obama administration appears to be planning to use the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) to force many web sites to either accommodate the disabled, or shut down. Given the enormous cost of complying, many small web sites might well just go dark and shut down. The administration wants to treat web sites as “places of public accommodation“ subject to the ADA, even though they are not physical places. Courts used to reject this argument when it was made just by disabled plaintiffs, but now that the Justice Department is making it, too, some judges are beginning to buy it, opening the door to trial lawyers surfing the web and sending out extortionate demand letters to every small business whose web site is not accessible to the blind (or perhaps too hard to understand for the mentally-challenged).
Can you say government wholesale censorship? Sure you can. And I can, too, but perhaps not for long.
I like Jim Carrey for his comic acting and ability. The Mask is hysterical, and snippets of his skits on In Living Color are as well. He wrote Pet Detective at night, then filmed it during the day – no sleep. He’s comedically brilliant.
And he’s from Canada. Seems like much of Hollywood emigrated from the Great White North to seek gold in California. And many have done just that. Lorne Greene and William Shatner are among the many others.
But, here Mr. Carrey and I part company…
Then there are the other Canucks…
I could list many more. And I value their opinions much more than I do Mr. Carrey’s.
Regardless, I’ll probably still watch him. We have rights to differing opinions in this country.
Of course, if he begins posing with enemy anti-aircraft guns, calling all U.S. forces war criminals or hugging Hugo Chavez, I will stop watching.
h/t Weasel Zippers
One of the things I’ve enjoyed about blogging is finding out persons from all over The United States, in fact, The World have clicked on a posting or a Google/Bing response and found their way here. I’ve stated many times before that I’m continually amazed anyone stops by – so anyone doing so makes me happy. Or used to.
I monitor the (meaningless) statistics about the blog – Where are readers located? How many? Total views for a 24 hour period. Then I compare that to what posts I did that given day in an effort to find more titles/subjects appealing to more readers. It really doesn’t affect my titles or content. I’m compulsive. It’s not as if I make any money doing this!
But, the other day, I quickly inserted a blog post blurb regarding the horrific tragedy in Connecticut, as the reports were coming in. Just the name of the town, Newtown Connecticut was the title.
And I was deeply saddened to see 333 search views in 24 hours! My average is 163 over the previous 28 days!
Are people so ghoulish that this is what drives them? Even worse is so-called ‘news’ organizations are so thirsty to ‘get the story first’ they report anything without verifying facts or sources!
It used to be there was a twenty-four hour news cycle, many times longer. Now it’s minutes; seconds. No time to verify anything, just get ‘it’ out there! If it’s wrong, we’ll submit a correction – or not.
And the people who just can’t wait to hear about the latest exploits of Lindsay Lohan or Honey Boo-Boo are waiting like vultures to lap it up. Or search for it on the Internet.
Today is the 221st Anniversary of the ratification by the Commonwealth of Virginia of the U.S. Constitution’s Bill of Rights, making it the Law of The Land! Of course, this document doesn’t grant rights, it simply enumerates some important rights lest the federal government forget they exist.
Two such enumerations come to mind today – Amendment I, reminding the government we inherently possess the rights to peaceably assemble; to petition the government to redress grievances; to prohibit the government from establishing religion; and prohibiting government interference with free speech and the press. Without which I might be restrained from writing this blog.
And, Amendment II, reminding the government the people inherently possess the right to keep and bear arms, without infringement. The lynch pin. A measure without whom the other nine amendments would be left to the whims of said government.
“When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.” - Thomas Jefferson
Blue’s Blog alerted me to (yet another) erosion of The Constitution. Okay, a continued erosion of The Constitution. (amended for fans of the previous Republican administration).
The House on Wednesday reauthorized for five years broad electronic eavesdropping powers that legalized and expanded the George W. Bush administration’s warrantless wiretapping program.
The FISA Amendments Act, (.pdf) which is expiring at year’s end, allows the government to electronically eavesdrop on Americans’ phone calls and e-mails without a probable-cause warrant so long as one of the parties to the communication is believed outside the United States. The communications may be intercepted “to acquire foreign intelligence information.”
The government has also interpreted the law to mean that as long as the real target is al-Qaida, the government can wiretap purely domestic e-mails and phone calls without getting a warrant from a judge. That’s according to David Kris, a former top anti-terrorism attorney at the Justice Department.
The measure is sponsored by Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas) and the Obama administration has called its passage a top intelligence priority. (.pdf) The bill generally requires the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act Court to rubber-stamp terror-related electronic surveillance requests that ensnare Americans’ communications…
As with so many of these things, it seems to have slipped under the radar of the Fourth Estate. You remember, the folks given the carte blanche of Free Speech to help in protecting our liberties? The ones who were merciless in beating up the previous administration for any real or perceived erosion of said liberties, or pretty much anything else?
Impartial my ass. The previous administration shouldn’t be given a pass – nor should the current one. Nor any other. Remember NIXON?
Blue should be a pit stop in your trip around the blogosphere, if he’s not already.