**
That update sort of slides into what has been bothering me lately. The First Amendment of the Constitution states, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
The Freedom of Speech clause doesn't mean we can stand up in a crowded theatre and scream, "Fire!" But it does mean we can voice our opinions about a candidate. If we disagree with what a candidate says, it is our right to say so. It is also our right to question that candidate in order to come to the truth. Unfortunately, that right seems to have been forgotten when applied to those who question or criticize Obama. To do so, it is said, is racist. Excuse me? How is it racist to ask about his association with a man who is proud to have planned the deaths of others, a confessed bomber who attempted to bring down this country? How is it racist to say Obama's comments about "redistribution of wealth" sound like they came straight from the Communist Manifesto by Marx? There are other examples but I'm sure you get my drift here.
While that is bad enough, what really bothers me is the double standard these same "enlightened" people are following and what it implies for this country should Obama be elected. They cry foul if their candidates are asked hard questions or if their policies are questioned. Yet they do nothing, say NOTHING when their followers hang Sarah Palin in effigy (and can you just imagine the howls of outrage if it was Obama being hung in effigy, as there should be) or when those same followers say Governor Palin should be raped and murdered. They support and, in my opinion, encourage MSM to report lies or distort the truth about Governor Palin and her family. Worse, when an average citizen dares to ask a hard question or dispute the claim that Obama is the savoiur this country needs, his life is placed under a microscope and he is vilified.
Politics has never been a "clean" arena. But the depths the parties and their supporters, especially the Democrats, have sunk to this election year is appalling. Aiding and abetting the Democrats in this is most of MSM. A survey has shown that the coverage of John McCain has been "substantially" negative, unlike that of Obama. ( http://journalism.org/node/13307 ). Yet another indication that the media no longer views its role as being the reporters of the news. Instead, they want to frame the news, make the news and, in doing so, influence us in such a way that their choice for president wins.
But back to freedom of speech. The actions of the Obama camp scare me. No, they terrify me. Our children and neighbors are being told to "get in their faces". And guess who they mean -- you and me. Those of us who don't accept the drivel MSM feeds us. Those who still value our right to ask the hard questions and say something doesn't make sense or sound right.
Please, before you step into the voting booth, think about this. Obama and Biden have shown they have no compunction at all when it comes to trying to shut down the members of the press who don't play ball with them. They tell their followers to "get in their face". This is a chilling portent of things to come if Obama is elected president. He shows us now that he has no respect for some of our most basic constitutional rights. Do you want him in a position of real power where, along with his pal Nancy Pelosi, he can actually silence those who don't agree with him?
I don't know about you, but that sounds an awful lot like that same Nazi Germany he once compared the US to. Just like his ideas about "redistributing the wealth" sounds like it came straight from the mouth of Karl Marx.
So, when you go into the voting booth, ask yourself these questions:
- Do I want a man running this country who tries to silence the press when it asks difficult, but valid, questions?
- Do I want a man running this country who stands by as his followers publicly attempt to destroy an average citizen simply because he spoke against the candidate's stand on an issue?
- Do I want a man running this country who is so willing to stand by someone (William Ayers) who not only professes a dislike for our country but who committed an act of domestic terrorism? A man who has repeatedly sidestepped or attempted to mislead the public about the truth of his relationship with William Ayers?
- Do I want a man running this country who has, for a number of years, said that he wants to put in place a system that would "redistribute the wealth" of the citizens of this country?
- And, finally, do I want a man running this country who doesn't seem to value those things that make this country great? (Freedom of the press, freedom of speech, the right to bear arms, the ability to do and be what you want as long as you work for it among others)
3 comments:
I agree with your reservations about Obama, and have no intention of voting for him.
Nevertheless, this is not a First Amendment issue.
The right to freedom of speech implies a right to freedom not to speak, and it is this right that the Obama campaign is exercising when they decide to cut off a media outlet from further interviews. Likewise, we have the right to ask questions, but we have no right to demand an answer.
Now, a refusal to answer might weigh on our decision to elect a candidate, and it is certainly a tradition that candidates offer themselves up for interviews and at least pretend to answer the questions asked. But nowhere here is there a First Amendment violation.
I think that the Obama campaign's behavior in this regard is reprehensible, and I think that various Democrat noises about reviving the Fairness Doctrine certainly touch on the First Amendment. But that Amendment protects obnoxious speech just as much as welcome speech if not more, and I think it's important not to sully the charge of "un-Constitutional" by crying wolf at mere "stuff we don't like".
Bryan,
First, thanks for the comments. However, I would like to clarify a couple of things.
Agreed, politicians do have the right not to speak to a particular reporter or media outlet. However, the flip side of that is the chilling effect it has on the media. If they know they will be punished for asking the hard questions, they will think twice the next time they have the opportunity to interview a candidate. That rocks the foundations of Freedom of the Press as well as Freedom of Speech.
It threatens Freedom of the Press in that it does nothing short of put a choke chain on them in this day and age when they rely on the ability to interview politicians and "people of interest" to curt not only viewers but advertisers as well. Freedom of Speech comes into play because there will still be those dedicated, impartial reporters who want to ask the hard questions but who are told by their bosses that they can't for the reasons noted above. So, yes, when a candidate decides to refuse to allow a reporter or media outlet access to the candidate and other members of the campaign, it can become a First Amendment issue.
Also, my comments go beyond the refusal of Joe Biden and the Obama campaign to meet with certain reporters. It goes to the double standard being applied by the Democrats to the term "free speech". Calling some of Obama's comments "socilaist" is now racist. But it's "free expression" to hang Sarah Palin in effigy or to say she should be raped and killed. Joe the Plumber makes comments the Obama campaign doesn't like and he becomes the target of attacks in the media to discredit him.
Finally, I'm not trying to "sully the charge of un-Constitutional" by crying wolf. What I am trying to do is point out that our rights to freedom of speech and press are being undermined and it is up to us to make sure this attempt to undermine our rights doesn't rise to the level of an unconstitutional attack.
Erm. I still disagree.
Stiffing a TV station just gives the station license to pull the old 60 Minutes trick: "In conclusion, for all we know, Candidate X is in favor of kicking old ladies down staircases. [raised eyebrow and ominous tone] The X campaign turned down our request for an interview."
As for the double standard: yes, it is a double standard. But idiot Democrats have as much right to say idiotic things as we have to say that they're idiotic. Crying "racism" only shuts down debate if you let it.
Post a Comment