Rep. Hank Johnson (D-GA), previously best known for his belief that the island of Guam could somehow tip over, is seeking an interesting way to fight what he considers an unfair ruling in the Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission ruling.
He wants an amendment to the Constitution that would control speech – a fundamental right guaranteed by the First Amendment.
Suddenly, the thought of Guam tipping over seems reasonable.
Via CBS Atlanta:
A Democratic representative is calling for an amendment to the United States Constitution that would allow for some legislative restriction of freedom of speech.
“We need a constitutional amendment that would allow the legislature to control the so-called free speech rights of corporations,” Rep. Hank Johnson (D-GA) was quoted as saying by CNS News.
He reportedly made these comments while speaking at the Annesbrooks HOA candidate Forum held last month.
This isn’t the first time we’ve heard this out of Democrats. Nancy Pelosi made similar comments back in April.
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 Court’s 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.
If you’re wondering how this would lead to censorship of everyday things like books, papers, or the internet, Chief Justice Roberts can explain.
The case in question led to this opinion written by Roberts:
“The government urges us in this case to uphold a direct prohibition on political speech,” wrote Roberts. “It asks us to embrace a theory of the First Amendment that would allow censorship not only of television and radio broadcasts, but of pamphlets, posters, the Internet, and virtually any other medium that corporations and unions might find useful in expressing their views on matters of public concerns.”
So we’re looking for a 28th Amendment to say, “You know that First Amendment … Just kidding!”
Confusing. Makes you just want to throw up your arms and say, “Whatever it is, I’m with the Constitution of the United States.”
Barack Obama? Controversial, racist preacher?
Via the Georgia Tipsheet:
The man who delivered the benediction at President Barack Obama’s 2009 inauguration said that he believes, as he once did in his “militant” youth, that all whites are hell-bound.
The Rev. Joseph Lowery, a patriarch of the civil rights movement and close ally of the president, said at a weekend rally in central Georgia that the “level and hatred and bitterness” borne of this election had made him a believer that whites were going to hell.
Lowery said, according to the Monroe County Reporter, it was the same belief he held at the height of the civil rights movement. Eventually he mellowed, believing that not all whites, rather only “most,” would get their brimstone comeuppance.
“Now,” the local newsweekly reported, “he is back to where he was.”
So the man went from delivering the benediction for the post-racial President, to four years later rekindling a previously held belief that all whites were Hell-bound?
In other words, the most racially polarizing Presidency in modern history turned a mellowed out racist back into being a hardcore racist.
Read the rest of the report to see some more controversial comments from the reverend.
Senator Saxby Chambliss (R-GA), has sent a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder, requesting that the Department of Justice investigate threatening actions being carried out against several conservative political commentators.
ABC News provides excerpts:
“I am writing with concern regarding recent reports that several members of the community of online political commentators have been targeted with harassing and frightening actions. Any potentially criminal action that incites fear, seeks to silence a dissenting opinion, and collaterally wastes the resources of law enforcement should be given close scrutiny at all levels,” Chambliss wrote in the letter.
“Regardless of any potential political differences that may exist, threats and intimidation have no place in our national political discourse. Those who choose to enter into that political discourse should not have to worry about potential threats to their or their family’s safety,” Chambliss continued. “While I am certain that local law enforcement is reviewing each of these instances, I am asking you to please look into each of these cases as well to determine if any federal laws may have been violated. Future targets of SWAT-ting, whether engaged in political speech or not, may not be so fortunate as to escape physical harm.”
The report goes on to mention the man suspected of these SWAT-ting attacks is Brett Kimberlin. You may remember, we covered him here a couple of weeks ago…
… everyone who reads a conservative blog is likely to learn his name – for Kimberlin is a serial domestic terrorist.
His terrorism ranges from the literal …
Kimberlin is known as the Speedway Bomber, who was convicted in 1981 of a series of bombings that caused extensive property damage, and severely mutilated a man who happened upon one of his explosive devices, eventually leading to the man’s suicide. Some law enforcement officials believed the bombings were actually an attempt to distract from the murder of an elderly woman in Indianapolis, a crime in which Kimberlin was a suspect.
To the legal …
Kimberlin has recently terrorized several bloggers through litigation, intimidation, and implied threats.
He attempted to frame Aaron Walker (a.k.a Aaron Worthing) of a crime, and cost him and his wife their jobs.
He has harassed Patterico to the point that he has crafted a rough draft explaining what has happened and distributed it to various people in the event that “an unfortunate accident were to befall” him.
He has targeted Liberty Chick.
And more recently, Kimberlin has terrorized the popular blogger known as The Other McCain (Robert Stacy McCain). Apparently, reporting on the Speedway Bomber’s past has once again resulted in unrelenting harassment by Kimberlin, this time forcing McCain to move his family out of state for their own safety.
But even within the ABC report, Kimberlin again proves himself to be a serial liar, stating (emphasis mine):
Kimberlin denied he was responsible for the post, even saying that he does not maintain any online presence and said he and his family have been victims of threats themselves and accused the bloggers of constructing a “false narrative” about him.
“I don’t blog, I don’t comment, I don’t tweet on any blogs at all. This is a right-wing attack on me and my organizations and it’s a smear job. It’s a swift boat action against us,” Kimberlin said. “What they’re doing is an obstruction of justice and it’s defamatory. We’re cooperating with the authorities in this matter. They have engaged in a massive smear campaign against us that has resulted in death threats to me and my family and to others associated with us.”
In another case which saw blogger Aaron Walker actually jailed for writing about the domestic terrorist, Kimberlin stated in court:
Mr. Walker has tweeted on Twitter about me in alarming and annoying ways over hundreds of times in the past week and urged others to attack me. He has generated hundreds of blog posts directly and indirectly based on false allegations that I framed him for an assault.
Mr. Walker has had many people threaten me directly with death, and told me to stop talking to the police, and not show up in court or I would die.
He ends up with a running tally of allegedly 14,000 tweets, which is astounding considering his entire Twitter history lists a total of just over 12,000 tweets. That aside, I’m curious how someone who doesn’t maintain any online presence was able to read thousands of tweets from Walker’s feed, and analyze the commentary section of “hundreds of blog posts”.
Here’s how – an eyewitness report of the Kimberlin/Walker case states:
Here’s what seems to have happened. Although Kimberlin’s first peace order against Walker was eventually thrown out on appeal, it appears that while it was in effect Walker wrote a blog post about Kimberlin. This triggered a Google Alert that Kimberlin had set up. Kimberlin filed criminal charges based on that, apparently claiming that constituted “contact.” The court apparently agreed, and Walker was arrested.
Harvesting Google alerts on your own name is not the same as somebody e-mailing you directly, but the fact that he set up Google alerts in the first place demonstrates some degree of internet proficiency.
I’m the director of several non profits in the area I work with human rights issues and government accountability issues and so it’s part of my job to to work on the internet because it’s basically a social networking job and so I get Google alerts all the time mentioning my my organizations, my name what work we do and (inaudible).
And of course, Kimberlin’s non-profits also maintain an online presence – Justice Through Music and Velvet Revolution come to mind.
So how does someone with no online presence maintain such a high level of online presence? ABC News and the rest of the mainstream media should be wondering the same.
The final question is, will the Department of Justice try to figure out who is responsible for these SWAT-tings, and will they investigate multiple complaints against a convicted bomber?
Time will tell…