THE SUPREME COURT'S 1ST AMENDMENT ARROGANCE

NY POST ^ | December 12, 2003 | LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

[Liz]

Not only did Bush sign this unconstitutional legislation into law, he acknowledged that he thought the legislation was unconstitutional. But instead of exercising his constitutional duty to kill the legislation, Bush deferred his authority to the courts. Don't like the ruling? Blame the president. Sal Repper Doylestown, Pa.

[StriperSniper]

As bad as soft money is, such capricious tinkering with our Constitution is even worse.

Burning the village to save it.

[Atlas Sneezed]

The Supreme Court's ruling can be viewed as an extension of Oliver Wendell Holmes ruling that you can't yell fire in a crowded theatre. That was a public safety issue to prevent panic and a good call.

---

Not exactly. Yelling "fire" is only prohibited when the cry is FALSE. There is no restriction on yelling it when it is reasonably believed to be true.

Sandra Dee just decided that we can't say the TRUTH about incumbent politicians pre-election.

[uncbob]

Imagine that! The public knows better that the supreme court what the Constitution says.

Like Walter Williams said " The Constitution ain't written in Hieroglyphics "

In addition the very reason the First was written was to protect poltical type speech and press not PORNOGRAPHY

[Sunshine Sister]

Exactly!

[jeremiah]

This is exactly the situation our "betters" want in the realm of politics. Unwilling to vote FOR anyone, driven to vote against those, that our leaders spend billions villifying as below human and evil. We sell out our GOD given rights as human beings, and waste our votes, not in joyous celebration of our society, and sweet anticipation of wonderful things to come, but fearful that those we elect, will take our freedoms away.

We as Americans have lost what Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, George Washington and so many others gifted to us, our Republic. So many have beaten the drums, and told us of how they would not allow this to happen. They would take up arms to defend their honor and the constitution of the United States of America they have sworn to defend. Truth is, noone will do it, they watch as the Supreme Court takes the nation away from the people, and wait for an overt move to disarm them. Too late, will we realize that the fight should have been years ago.

Our country and our freedoms, should not depend on who is in office. We as a people have allowed the Congress to shrug off the responsibility of keeping the Executive and the Judicial in check. Cheered when a President of our own party, increases the size and scope of this behemoth govt, booed when the opposition party does the same. Not thinking that the only difference between the two, is party affiliation, and personality.

Now we are looking at a Court, that says pornography is free speech, and political discourse is not.

The Minutemen would not wait, the march on DC Concord would have already begun. It is no coincidence that our borders are unguarded, and the young Patriots are stationed in Iraq, S. Korea or Germany.

If our leaders were serious about this war on terror, the borders would be secure. If they wanted to end the bleeding in Iraq, they would string wire around the trouble zones, announce terms of surrender, then level the area. Preferably after those willing came out. Instead, things are left in limbo. If the problems were resolved, people at home would no longer fear, and want govt to scale back. But this beast feeds on fear, it grows on suspicions, and there is no shortage of these negative emotions going around. The political beasts of America thrive on this climate.

[Eala]

If she were a democrat the Congress would impeach her

You're kidding, right? Congress --the very same crooks who give you districts shaped like the following-- love this "incumbency protection" law...

[jeremiah]

Why haven't the Presidents words on the CFR been trumpeted? I beleive he said that he is cheered by the Supreme Courts decision, but haven't seen the article on this site, or written in any paper yet.

[John R. (Bob) Locke]

Good point, and one the Bush supporters don't want to hear. If he was so convinced that the SCOTUS was going to strike down many of this law's provisions, then why are his people out and about applauding the decision? Why aren't the mouthpieces saying that they thought this part and that part would be struck down and are surprised that they weren't?

[jeremiah]

I am afraid, that people are so frightened by the prospect of Democrat control, that they will follow GW off any cliff he leads them too. Dare I say it, the Republicans have become like the Democrats. As Clinton could do no wrong according to his supporters, GW cannot betray his base out of their support either.

[GregoryFul]

The point is that now our rulers have stated openly that the law of the land is what THEY say it is.

It has been that way for a long time now. These bastards are just getting bolder and more arrogant. And the new royalty will continue to encroach on the peoples' "inalienable" rights until the people push back - it usually happens periodically by bloody revolution, in a sudden and violent upheaval, when the oppression becomes obvious and painful. We are about one economic disaster away from that...

However, an additional strategy used by the elite is the dumbing down of the sheeple. It seems about 1 in 10 can name the VP of the US - what proportion of the population might know that their rights are being trashed by the political bosses? 1 of 100? Not enough to man the resistance.

Howcome the $hits stopped at 60 days, why not 180 or 360? Maybe next year, eh? These hidious turds agree that "pseudo" child porn is protected by the Constitution, but political speach is not. What corrupt, soulless creeps they are.

[aristeides]

the Congress will leave her lone and wait for an opportunity to make her chief justice.

Well, there's been talk of making her chief justice. Hopefully, that's now impossible.

[aristeides]

They give us bread and circuses so we won't notice that we've lost our freedom.

[GregoryFul]

And we are led by president Nero...

[Caleb1411]

On the subject of First Amendment usurpation, . . .

[Liz]

You nailed it but good. That's about the size of it.