Skip to comments.Pelosi: Amend the First Amendment
Posted on 04/19/2012 2:11:32 PM PDT by Sub-Driver
Pelosi: Amend the First Amendment By Terence P. Jeffrey April 19, 2012
(CNSNews.com) - House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi on Thursday endorsed a movement announced by other congressional Democrats on Wednesday to ratify an amendment to the U.S. Constitution that would allow Congress to regulate political speech when it is engaged in by corporations as opposed to individuals.
The First Amendment says in part: "Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press..."
Television networks, newspapers, publishing houses, movie studios and think tanks, as well as political action committees, are usually organized as, or elements of, corporations.
Pelosi said the Democrats' effort to amend the Constitution is part of a three-pronged strategy that also includes promoting the DISCLOSE Act, which would increase disclosure requirements for organizations running political ads, and reducing the roll of money in campaigns (which some Democrats have said can be done through taxpayer funding of campaigns).
The constitutional amendment the Democrats seek would reverse the Supreme Courts 2009 decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. In that decision the court said that the First Amendment protects a right of free speech for corporations as well as for individuals, and that corporations (including those that produce newspapers, films and books) have a right to speak about politicians and their records just as individuals do.
We have a clear agenda in this regard: Disclose, reform the system reducing the roll of money in campaigns, and amend the Constitution to rid it of this ability for special interests to use secret, unlimited, huge amounts of money flowing to campaigns, Pelosi said at her Thursday press briefing.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnsnews.com ...
The Founders of the US foresaw assholes like Pelosi. That’s one of the reasons why, although they couldn’t predict the future, they included a provision to amend the Constitution while making it difficult to amend it at the same time.
Such decisions should not be made lightly or at the whim of current fads, or by leftist air-heads.
Anyone who works on a 1099 basis is a corporation.
OK Nan. But if you REALLY want to go down that road, don’t you think you ought to repeal the 2nd Amendment first?
Anyone who works on a 1099 basis is a corporation.
Not exactly. Anyone who works on a "1099" basis is a "sole proprietor."
another recipient of a 1099 is an independent contractor. That independent contractor may be a corporation ( a legal person) or it may be an individual. Corporations are not required to report 1099 income separate from sales
Can anyone in Washington find the OFF button on Pelosi?
Yeah...but I don't think anyone really wants to go "there"...pretty disgusting ;)
Will you folks in San FRancisco please put us out of our misery?
Madam Pelousy needs to be retired in 2012!
Pelosi is living proof that:
a) If you are a psychotic, you can rise to the top of the Democratic Party.
b) that Michael Savage is right, Liberalism is a mental disease.
c) Pelosi is not taking her meds.
There is no way this will go anywhere, at least in its current form. The Democratic Party does care about what the media think, and there's no way the national newspapers and television networks are going to tolerate an amendment to the First Amendment restricting free speech rights of media corporations. Some might say, “Well, we'll just write the amendment so it doesn't apply to media corporations, just other corporations.” That won't work either because it gives the government a back-door method to decide what is and is not “media,” and thereby create a licensing system for non-broadcast media as well as the existing licensing system for radio and television broadcast frequencies which is very dubious constitutionally but probably unavoidable.
I'll give Pelosi credit for one and only one thing: at least she's honest about trying to amend the Constitution to accomplish her goals. That's the legitimate way to make major changes, via the supermajorities in Congress and of the state legislatures. That's the way things are supposed to work. If we had a Supreme Court that did its job rather than trying to do the job of Congress, many of our judicially-created de-facto laws would never have happened without a constitutional amendment, and we would have had the long drawn-out debate that the Founders intended on major changes to the foundational principles of our free republic.
It’ll probably pass.
This proves that the left is now becoming more open about their true agenda- to stifle free speech.
Obviously San Fran Nan knows this could never pass either House, but instead is trying to score cheap political points to fire up the base for Hussein
>”Anyone who works on a 1099 basis is a corporation”<
Oh man, I’m screwed...
Pelosi is a very dangerous anti-freedom propagandist who needs to be defeated and humiliated. Depriving her of her political microphone by beating her would give her a taste of her own efforts to muzzle free speech.
Pelosi may as well go all the way and change the amendment to say that speech against liberalism or for conservatism is illegal.
Mad Cow Disease or just plain evil? You decide.
This bitch must either resign or be expelled, or otherwise removed (recalls, dumped at the ballot box).
Yeah, my jaw dropped when she said that.
25 years ago, we had Ronald Reagan, Johnny Cash, and Bob Hope.
If you can't appreciate the pure beauty of the violin after hearing this, something's wrong with your ears.
Or you can get raw with these strings.
How about this gamechanger from America's Got Talent (which they SHOULD have won).
And finally, this, dedicated to the one and only rdb2, WHO HAS RETURNED HOME!.
Either way, the violin is sweet yet LETHAL.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.