There is ongoing activity where the Feds are working to define who is
and who is not a “bona fide journalist” for the express purpose of determining
who should receive protection under the 1st amendment (as if only “journalists”
have this right). Here is a good backgrounder on the measure. Today the senate approved this measure, aided by the cover of useless noise about a government shutdown. Statists will ensure that government only grows in aggregate. A permanent shutdown of large sections of the federal government would be a benefit to the people at the expense of the parasites. So don't expect anything but short term theater from it. Meanwhile, important things such as the dismantling of the constitution get little to no media coverage. Go figure.
If this becomes federal law then the feds will use it as cover to go after anyone
who is not on their “bona fide” list who does not toe the party line. It should be perfectly clear by now that
government has, can, does and will attack persons and groups which have
different political views than those currently in charge. It is not a conspiracy theory. It is fact.
They admitted to it: the IRS
got busted attacking conservatives and Lois
Lerner (head of IRS) was force to retire as a result (as if that is good
punishment – she should be in jail). By the way, if you catch these people in 1 scam it is only reasonable to believe that 10 others have gone by unnoticed. That is simply how crime works.
The redefinition of definitions and the addition of unintended
clarifications (i.e. another application of sophistry) is how the con men slowly
convince people to give up their rights.
It is of course a con job. We all
have the inalienable right to free speech under the constitution. These idiots think that if they can slowly
redefine the constitution that they can get the upper hand on the people. While they might achieve their goal It is a
fool’s errand nonetheless.
The constitution is what makes the United States “united”. It is the tie that binds. It is the social contract that convinces
people to remain part of the experiment in government known as the United States. Without it, the federal government has no
legal or moral grounds to set laws or to enforce them. Without the constitution there is no United
States and, without the associated declaration of unity, all powers claimed by federal bureaucrats to tax and
control the people will be ignored (or worse).
The con men running the show think they can have it both ways. They think they can remove all the constitutional
glue and not have the whole thing unravel.
They are willing to give that a try if we let them even though I assure
you they will be very sorry if they ever succeed in their goals.
If any of your representatives are on this list of senators who voted to pass this attack on the first amendment, I urge you to email or call them. Please tell them that trampling the constitution or limiting its effect to small,
government selected portions of the population using new rules is a really,
really bad idea not just for America but for their political careers in specific:
- Max Baucus (D -MT)
- Lindsey Graham (R-SC)
- Michael Bennet (D-CO)
- Barbara Boxer (D-CA)
- Maria Cantwell (D-WA)
- Thomas Harkin (D-IA)
- Amy Klobuchar (D-MN)
- Patty Murray (D-WA)
- John Tester (D-MT)
- Tom Udall (D-NM)
- Kelly Ayotte (R-NH)
- John Isakson (R-GA)
- Tammy Baldwin (D-WI)
- Richard Blumenthal (D-CT)
- Roy Blunt (R-MO)
- Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY)
- Claire McCaskill (D-MO)
- Chris Coons (D-DE)
- Mazie Hirono (D-HI)
- Patrick Leahy (D-VT)
Thanks to Obamacare, the HHS also got to decide what constitutes a religious institution and therefore deserving of the protections of the 1st Amendment, nailing it down practically to just churches and ruling out schools, hospitals, etc to claim this.
ReplyDeleteOne may agree or disagree with these definitions, but in no way is it up to the government to decide how an institution determines itself. Not only does it lack that power, it's immoral.
Definitely the 1st Amendment is at the top of the list among the protections of the rights of the people and therefore also at the top of the list of any government in whose way such rights get.