Skip to comments.Congress about to limit political speech of bloggers?
Posted on 05/19/2010 12:58:50 PM PDT by Free ThinkerNY
The same sloppy legislative writing that created so many unintended consequences in ObamaCare also plagues the DISCLOSE Act, the effort in Congress to tighten spending rules in the wake of the Citizens United decision and thats the generous take on the situation. Reasons Bradley Smith and Jeff Patch warn that the perhaps-unintended consequences of legislative language will allow the FEC to regulate political speech online. The fact that media entities like the New York Times have specific exemptions built into the bill makes the intent, or lack thereof, rather murky:
Last week, a congressional hearing exposed an effort to give another agencythe Federal Election Commissionunprecedented power to regulate political speech online. At a House Administration Committee hearing last Tuesday, Patton Boggs attorney William McGinley explained that the sloppy statutory language in the DISCLOSE Act would extend the FECs control over broadcast communications to all covered communications, including the blogosphere.
The DISCLOSE Acts purpose, according to Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee chair Chris Van Hollen and other reformers, is simply to require disclosure of corporate and union political speech after the Supreme Courts January decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission held that the government could not ban political expenditures by companies, nonprofit groups, and labor unions.
The bill, however, would radically redefine how the FEC regulates political commentary. A section of the DISCLOSE Act would exempt traditional media outlets from coordination regulations, but the exemption does not include bloggers, only a communication appearing in a news story, commentary, or editorial distributed through the facilities of any broadcasting station, newspaper, magazine or other periodical publication
(Excerpt) Read more at hotair.com ...
tolcha Obambi’s snarky remark about technology last week was the camel sniffing around the tent.
Democrats = National Socialists (NAZIS)
I realize I’m stating the obvious here, but this is nothing short of EVIL, and FOUL, UNCONSTITUTIONAL CENSORSHIP!
So what are you gonna do about it? ( part snark and part serious).
Here in Michigan a republican legislator introduced a bill last week that would require certification to be considered a legitimate “journalist”.
“Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech.”
That darnded negative constitution.
Didn't take long...........
“But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security”
The second amendment is meant to protect the first. If they pass this law,, all blogging should continue, DARING them to enforce it. Violence is a moral response to *anyone* who comes out to arrest a man, for merely writing his political thoughts and opinions.
that’s a good question. we could:
1. vote them out in november. but then again, as shown last time, you can stuff the boxes in 17 states and once you win you can shut down the fbi investigation against you.
2. protest. then again, 2.5m people were standing on the steps of congress last sept trying to stop the healthcare bill from passing... and they didn’t care. they pushed it through anyhow.
3. you could protest like david thoreau and not pay taxes, thereby defunding them... of course, they are already spending money they don’t have so that won’t work.
4. you could start a blog, as recommended by a congressional staffer... but then, considering the article, i’m fairly certain it’d have zero impact. on top of that, i’m fairly certain a blog would not carry the viewership as a nationwide broadcast
have any other ideas? (and obviously i’m holding back one solution)
What a shock, huh??!! Try to “regulate” those who actually tell the truth and report the news. Naturally there’s no need to regulate the “mainstream media.” It’s already a wing of the democrat party.
Nazis liked their country but feared the people. Democrats fear both.
Amendment 1 to ten are not compatible with communism and must be eliminated.
If they regulate blogging, it’s as bad as demanding guns be turned in. If they move, the blogging continues in utter defiance of the law. Then THEY either ignore it or try to enforce their new law.
If they come to enforce, (Concord, Boston,,) we do not seek or start any violence, we only demand they desist. If they try to arrest or enforce, we defend by any means.
I feel that is perfectly moral and linear. No man has a right to regulate what an individual writes about politics and spreads as widely as he can.
Find out how efficiently it may be violated, and do so with great enthusiasm and regularity.
Pick a box. Soap, ballot, jury, bullet.
But more than guns,, they fear sunshine and crowds. If they come to arrest a blogger, there should be a crowd of 5000 surrounding the blogger. They love to pick off low hanging fruit quietly. They will even arrest an illegal alien on the side of the road. But they won’t take on 10,000 in broad daylight.
We can use the same tactic.
They won’t dare. These tea parties have scared them bad.
20 bucks says the internet and FoxNews go way-way about October to “prevent any more of this kind of attack on America”....
My plan exactly. I’d make a horribly bad blogger, but I’d do it in protest.
Won’t work. Too many Moochers on the dole.
The way I see it, is that the FR is a website of individuals that are like minded and that we are merely communicating between each other. This should make any attempt by BO and company to regulate or control this as an abridgement of our right to privacy. Nobody makes them view these sites. On the other hand, the major networks are liscensed by the gov’t and they control what we see and hear.
It would be surprising if today’s Congress would NOT try to stifle political speech or bend it to their advantage.
Good grief, did it have to take this long to realize it?
Weathermen Led Prison Escape Of LSD Advocate
timothy leary and allen dulles [THE EMPIRE OF “THE CITY”]
Timothy Leary & Satanism
William Ayers In His Own Words - Marxism, Anarchy, Jewish Fundamentalism, and More
The Weather Underground
Who Wrote “Dreams from My Father”? (1 of 2)
Who Wrote “Dreams from My Father”? (2 of 2)
Obama Drug Use From Dreams Of My Father 1995
CIA Mind Control
Is Obama a Manchurian Candidate?
The shocking video Muslims don’t want you to see!!
How To Detect Covert Hypnosis
Obama - Sensory Specific Words
Obama without his teleprompter
Barack Obama “Uh” Count
sounds like an issue that could tie up the Federal Courts for the next thirteen years
I live outside the USA and can post a blog from overseas... I imagine anyone could.
“Unintended consequences”? I don’ t believe that for a second. Obama and his lefties want to regulate what anyone says about them. They do not want anything leaking out about what they are up to until one morning you wake up and we are under Marshall law.They we will spend the rest of u=our lives telling our kids and grand kids what a wonderful place the USA used to be before BO.You the press think this is only for bloggers? Think again!
My guess is that theyll use the ISPs to police the content. Theyll scan for combinations of words and/or key words. Theyll then pull the plug on anything objectionable. (A SPAM filter works similarly.) Theyll enforce it by making it simply unavailable.
What we might do is develop really sophisticated email programs. Well send articles via email. Or, perhaps well be able to use the phone system to text small stuff. (Obama-shirts raiding south Tampa today. Convoy to take arrestees to Stark Federal Reeducation Facility on Thursday.)
The First Amendment doesn't discriminate between "journalists" and any other kind of nonfiction (or even fiction) publishing. You're a journalist?" Big whoop!
In this case it will require a “legitimate journalist” vouching for you.
Big Journalism - Associated Press journalism - is the Establishment, and a law which gives wire service journalism privileges to speak/print/blog not available to those disfavored by Big Journalism would establish a title of nobility IMHO. Unconstitutional.