Tag Archives: Free Speech

Warn Martha Stewart: Leave that spatula home if you’re going to Canada!

Seriously folks, you’re gonna love this. It’s so obvious that I don’t need to write any comments. This story speaks for itself –

From The Sun

OTTAWA — American academic and former militant radical Bill Ayers won’t be allowed to enter Canada, according to an association of university faculty who had asked him to speak at an upcoming conference.

Ayers was scheduled to speak at a conference on higher education and to the media in Toronto on June 16, but the Ontario Confederation of University Faculty Associations said Wednesday Ayers won’t be allowed to enter Canada.

“Ontario’s university professors and academic librarians are appalled that Canada’s borders are becoming a barrier to the free exchange of ideas,” stated Mark Langer, president of the faculty association. “Bill Ayers is a respected academic, and in no way a threat to the peace and security of Canada. There is no reason why he should be kept out.”

Ayers gained notoriety in the 1960s and 70s as a founding member of the radical militant protest group Weather Underground. In 2009, Ayers was detained by the Canada Border Services Agency and denied entry into Canada.

“In the past, we have admitted Martha Stewart, a convicted felon. Just a few weeks ago, we also let in Geert Wilders, a far-right Dutch politician currently being prosecuted for violations of his country’s hate speech laws,” Langer said in a news statement Wednesday. “Based on this record, one wonders if Ayers is being kept out of Canada for purely political reasons, something that is unacceptable in a free and democratic society.”

A spokesman for Public Safety Minister Vic Toews wouldn’t confirm whether Ayers had been told to stay away, but did say it’s up to the individual traveler to make sure they comply with the law.

“The Canada Border Services Agency is operationally responsible for enforcing applicable Canadian law, including the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA),” wrote Chris McCluskey in an email. “It is up to the individual traveler to satisfy the CBSA officer that he or she is admissible to Canada under IRPA.”


Quote of the day – Michael Goodwin

[T[he American system, we learn again, is intolerant of only one thing: intolerance. Whether its hammer comes from left or right, it always wakes the spirit of revolution. Freedom of speech, to dissent, to oppose, to fight back, is not just the literal content of the First Amendment. It is the essence of who we are as a people.

Obama, of course, infamously discounted American Exceptionalism when he was asked about it, suggesting he does not view our national character as unique. His mistake. ~ Michael Goodwin/FoxNews


Jason Levin’s new business venture

Jason Levin’s website that called for the dismantling and demolishing of the Tea Party has been taken down and he replaced it with this.

from Cafepress.com

Support free speech by supporting the suppression of speech.

A genius move! Boy, this teacher’s brilliant. And he’s teaching middle school kids, or he is when he’s not on suspension and under investigation. The guy is opposed to capitalism, while he’s selling t-shirts to support his anti-capitalism, anti-Tea Party goofy ideology.

The hypocrisy of the left is, as Obama says, amusing.  They only support free speech as long as it’s their speech. They oppose and demonize capitalism, unless they are making money.

It might surprise this jackass Levin to know but the Tea Party supports and will defend his right to free speech even as he advocates gagging ours. Unlike Levin and his president, Tea Partiers believe in the Constitution.

More left/green hypocrisy here, ala Al Gore.  And how about GE paying NO taxes this year? As Mark Levin said, if that corporation had been Exxon or Haliburton, there would be cars burning in the streets – rioting all over. But because it’s GE (parent company of NBC and communications arm for the Obama administration) it’s all okay.


Ann Coulter victim of Canadian hate crimes

These are her interviews and story on Canadian television regarding her “welcome” in Canada. It’s a 3 part video. And the story is here.

I like Ann. I just wish she weren’t so anorexic and unhealthy looking.


SCOTUS rules to protect free speech

4 of the 9 Supreme Court justices are in favor of book banning and speech censorship. F-O-U-R  of them. And the 5 who voted in favor of the First Amendment are being called ACTIVISTS. Now, isn’t that ironic? To be in favor of the Constitution is now considered radical.

Amazing.

The case of Citizens United v. Federal Elections Commission was decided last week by the U.S. Supreme Court, in a sqeeker vote that should scare all Americans. This case has unveiled to the public, the justices who would be in favor of censoring free speech and who are willling to ignore the first amendment’s stark and direct language:

“Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press…”

How much clearer could the Founders have been?

From the AP:

When the Supreme Court first heard the case in March, Deputy Solicitor General Malcolm Stewart, representing the FEC, was pulled into a discussion of an issue that took him down a slippery slope: If the movie were a book, would the government ban publishing the book if it mentioned a candidate for office within the election time frame?

Stewart said that it could.

“That’s pretty incredible,” Justice Samuel Alito said.

Then came questions about electronic devices such as the Kindle.

“If it has one name, one use of the candidate’s name, it would be covered, correct?” Chief Justice John Roberts asked.

“That’s correct,” Stewart replied.

“It’s a 500-page book, and at the end it says, ‘And so vote for X,’ the government could ban that?” Roberts asked.

[David] Bossie [founder of Citizens United and maker of Hillary the Movie] said this was the argument that turned a majority of the bench against the FEC and in favor of Citizens United.

“That sent a chill down the Supreme Court,” Bossie said. The argument became a “point of demarcation.”

The marxists progressives are now screaming outrage. This from the Wall Street Journal:

President Obama was especially un-Presidential yesterday, putting on his new populist facade to call it “a major victory for big oil, Wall Street banks, health insurance companies” and other “special interests.” Mr. Obama didn’t mention his union friends as one of those interests, but their political spending will also be protected by the logic of this ruling. The reality is that free speech is no one’s special interest. New York Senator Chuck Schumer vowed to hold hearings, and the Naderite Public Citizen lobby is already calling for a constitutional amendment that bans free speech for “for-profit corporations.” Liberalism’s bullying tendencies are never more on display than when its denizens are at war with the speech rights of its opponents.

But the marxists progressives make no mention of networks like MSNBC that is owned by the corporate giant General Electric and that has been nothing short of the communications center for the Obama administration. This case protects their free speech, as well.

As David Bossie writes at BigJournalism.com:

Finally, as the Court acknowledged, the position that corporations cannot engage in political speech has a fatal logical flaw.  Almost every major media outlet in the country is owned by a corporation and most of them advocate for or against candidates via endorsements, opinion columns, or politically-oriented programming.  Why should General Electric, which owns MSNBC, be permitted to use its nearly unlimited resources to influence elections, while I, who made Hillary The Movie using corporate funds for roughly .03% of the budget, could be put in prison for airing the documentary?

What is really frightening is that TheOne has 3 more years to appoint justices. One more liberal appointment could change the entire complexion of the Constitution and it’s protection of Americans. Those appointees have to be confirmed by congress. This is just another urgent reason that Constitutionalists must be elected this  year.


huh? No free speech on the House floor anymore!

When you control the language, you control the thoughts…

Politico.com

House guidelines for Presidential put-downs

House Rules Committee Chairwoman Louise Slaughter (D-NY) has released a helpful, updated primer for members regarding their conduct on the floor and in committees.

Especially useful: The section on how to properly insult the executive branch in the in the chamber.

“Disgrace” and “nitwits” — okay.

“Liar” or “sexual misconduct” — ixnay.

Under section 370 of the House Rules and Manual it has been held that a Member could:

• refer to the government as “something hated, something oppressive.”
• refer to the President as “using legislative or judicial pork.”
• refer to a Presidential message as a “disgrace to the country.”
• refer to unnamed officials as “our half-baked nitwits handling foreign affairs.”

Likewise, it has been held that a member could not:

• call the President a “liar.”
• call the President a “hypocrite.”
• describe the President’s veto of a bill as “cowardly.”
• charge that the President has been “intellectually dishonest.”
• refer to the President as “giving aid and comfort to the enemy.”
• refer to alleged “sexual misconduct on the President’s part.”

h/t Marty Kady, who is neither a nitwit nor a liar.


Why the left is so afraid of the TEA Party

Most of us think that right on the heels of the Declaration of Independence came the greatest work of mankind, the Constitution: Thomas Jefferson closeted himself up after declaring the country separate and independent from Great Britain, and then wrote the Constitution.

Not so.

The Declaration of Independence was written over 10 years before the Constitution. The Founders tried a thing called the Articles of Confederation, first. It ended up not working out very well, or at least as many of the Founders believed.

It took a little known and little understood rebellion to bring about the birth of the Constitution. Daniel Shays, a farmhand who had fought in the Revolutionary War, at Bunker Hill and Lexington, came home to Massachusetts to find himself penniless, property-less and on his way to debtor’s prison due to back-breaking taxes and debt and no compensation for his military service. He also found that he was not alone in his suffering.

The long and short of it is that Shays was one of many Revolutionary War veterans and farmers who demanded redress from the government and the government retaliated by doing some really unconstitutional things like suspending habeas corpus – holding people in jail without trial – denying the right of assembly and confiscating property.

To be clear, these farmers didn’t want to topple a government. They just wanted a fair shake from the sheriffs, the courts and the government. To show they meant business, they would swoop in to villages and surround courthouses, menacing the law officials and the judges. Local officials were loath to call out a militia, knowing that they would likely desert rather than take up arms against the unhappy farmers and their former Revolutionary comrades-in-arms.

But make no mistake, this was not a bloodless revolt. Hundreds were killed and thousands thrown in jail.

This rebellion put a real fear in the ambassador to the Court of St. James, John Adams, whose cousin and great American Revolutionary leader, Samuel Adams, had a hand in suspending habeas corpus and wrote a Riot Act in Massachusetts. This particular act was similar to one in Great Britain that gave power to local officials to order crowds larger than twelve to disperse if they were deemed unlawful or riotous.  If the group failed to break up in a certain amount of time, they were held as guilty of a felony and the penalty, in Great Britain at least, was punishment by death.

George Washington

George Washington

George Washington, who had returned to his beloved Mount Vernon to once again be a gentleman farmer and landowner became alarmed at the news trickling down from the Northeast. “For God’s sake tell me what is the cause of all these commotions,” he implored a friend in the fall of 1787. Was it being promoted by the Tories to cause unrest and discontent or, he wondered, were these real grievances by the citizens that required just attention from the government? The most worrisome part of this all, for Washington, was the appearance to the Brits and Europeans that America could not govern itself.

Far from all this in Paris was Thomas Jefferson. Jefferson didn’t seem to be as alarmed as his revolutionary comrades were. To Abigail Adams, he wrote “I like a little rebellion now and then. It’s like a storm in the atmosphere.” Of course, he didn’t favor a bloody rebellion but he feared repression and tyranny more. Jefferson believed that a better educated citizenry and the free exchange of ideas was the path for a great republic. He believed in a free press and said that he’d rather have newspapers and no government than a government without newspapers.

The Jefferson Memorial

The Jefferson Memorial

Jefferson could not be too alarmed, yet at least, at the rebellions in Massachusetts because after all,  they had ALL been rebels and revolutionaries, and only a short time ago. That year – 1787 – with constant correspondence between John and Abigail (in London) and himself, he kept the same steady line with the Adamses that “the tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure.”

At 81, Ben Franklin was at home in Philadelphia, overseeing the addition to his house, spending time at the city’s public library which he had established, enjoying his grandchildren and visiting with friends at the American Philosophical Society, which he helped found. He would soon be called back into service when the 2nd Continental Congress would meet again and establish for all time, the Constitution of the United States of America.

Ben’s brother, James, the editor of the New England Courant was thrown into jail when Ben was 16. At that time, Ben wrote that there is “no such thing as publick Liberty, without Freedom of Speech which is the right of every Man, as far as by it, he does not hurt or control the Right of another.” He believed that the overthrow of a nation will only begin with the subduing of free speech and a free press.

James Madison

James Madison

Enter the Father of Federalism, James Madison, Father of the Constitution; the Bill of Rights; an author of the Federalist Papers (which is still acknowledged as the most important commentary on the Constitution); a Founding Father of the United States of America; as Secretary of State for Jefferson, he would be instrumental in the Louisiana Purchase which would double the size of the nation and he would become the 4th president of the United States. His ingenious three-branch federal system with its checks and balances was the basis for the Constitution that we have today. Madison, like Jefferson and Washington, was a Virginian and like both men, he would leave the presidency poorer than when he entered it. This man alone could take up volumes of blog for me. Suffice it to say that this was the intellectual hero who rode into Philadelphia, in 1787 and was instrumental in creating the true and sustaining great nation that the United States of America would become.

And the catalyst to this Constitutional Convention of great thinkers and Founders, which produced the most magnificent document of all mankind was a little known, little understood grassroots rebellion in Massachusetts. To be clear, there were other things, aside from the Shay’s Rebellion that were happening at the same time and were weighing heavily on creating a “more perfect union” and that called together such great minds as those mentioned: high tariffs, a financial depression, non-uniform currency, to name a few.

But in the subconscious of the modern day Leftist,  grassroots uprisings like the TEA Parties strike fear in their hearts (if any have hearts) of a 222 year old rebellion that was the lightening rod for the Founders and the foundation of the greatest nation known to man.

Yes, they should be afraid.