http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2012/02/houses-passes-new-bill-that-would-make.html
another source above.
Typical of Blumenthal. At a glance, it doesn’t appear to do a whole lot more than the existing law. But the Stolen Honor Senator gets his name on something.
The federal fascists pass one more piece of legislation which cements their protected status into law.
Where are those people yakking about how the GOP retaking the House was a real good thing?
A real good rubber stamp, that’s all it is.
Here’s one of the thread from earlier, the one before that, I didn’t participate in, so don’t know the keywords for it.
Same title, posted by “combat boots”:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2852903/posts
(P.S. I’m not razing you about a duplicate thread—I’ve never cared about that—just replying to the “Anyone have more info?” question.)
FWIW - RT is Russia Today, a propaganda news organization. I have a liberal friend who watches it, they swear by it. I won’t have it turned on in my house.
all that aside, if this bill is a reality, will it prevent Code Pinkos from entering Congress and nearly assaulting the Secretary of State like what happened with COndoleeza Rice? Don’t see much of them since 0 took office. I sear Boxer and Pelosi always let them in the gallery.
Keep pushing @$$holes! The tea party is watching and keeping score. Your day of reckoning is coming.
And consider for a moment all those heated townhall meetings from 2010...now illegal? Consider for a moment that an elected representative speaking at a Tea Party Rally....you could be arrested? This is not my country anymore if we have no way for redress.
So if I am reading this correctly, if I am on the street protesting if Obumer come thru my town, I would get in trouble?
My first thought is that the Occutards are starting to scare people in power.
It is easy to get useful idiots riled up, but much harder to control them.
The First Amendment protects the rights of peaceable assembly and petitions for redress. Most "protests" are not peaceable, in that they are intended to evoke a response from either bystanders or authorities which can be put to good use by the seditious media or, now, social media.
Nothing that was done by OWS, for example, was peaceable. Blocking a sidewalk is not peaceable. Drumming all night is not peaceable. Shitting on a police car is not peaceable. Removing MacPherson Square from public use and scaring little children is not peaceable.
The original lunch counter sit ins had the explicit purpose of causing the protesters to be arrested. MLK, in the "Letter from a Birmingham Jail", explained the theory and practice very well, and he NEVER asserted that his sit ins and marches enjoyed the protection of the First Amendment.
I don't really understand how we got from there to here, but outlawing some or all "protests", in contrast to outlawing peaceable assemblies, is perfectly constitutional.
Seems like things are ramping up. What a terrible time and future this will be to live in. Hopefully not, but we shall see.
Uhhh!
Did anybody notice the source of the article is “Russia Today”?
I’ve heard a lot of Liberals say that “laws are meant to be broken”. Gee, I wonder what they’ll say when the shoe is on the other foot? The day is coming when people yearning for freedom will have to ignore the laws of despots.