In a 1998 meeting with reporters then-First Lady Hillary Clinton said:
It wasn’t so much a matter of hiring a gatekeeper, it was more a matter of which bureaucracy provided the gatekeeper with the authority to override the First Amendment. It looks like Ann Ravel over at the Federal Elections Commission got the job. Notice that in 1998 an Internet gatekeeper was needed to protect reputations. Somewhere along the way the gatekeeper’s duties grew to include this:
A quick look at arming federal bureaucrats tells us that Hillary’s gatekeeper(s) will end up carrying guns!
Considering all of the unpunished campaign contributions larceny and stolen elections Democrats get away with, this question takes on some importance:
Why indeed! A police force staffed by deaf, dumb, and blind cops does a helluva lot more to enforce the law than ever did the FEC.
And once again the filthy lying sneaks act like they are morally superior to America’s Founding Fathers:
Make no mistake on this issue. Abolishing the First Amendment will be accomplished by one or anther piece of moral garbage. If you doubt it look at all of the moral filth that is used to justify oppressive government; i.e., take liberties away from productive Americans for the common good.
In the same vein the First Amendment guarantees freedom of speech to everyone while:
Question: Why does freedom of the press NOT require an FEC gatekeeper? Answer: The press is an instrument of government.
In addition to the obvious answer, nobody in the federal government would need a gatekeeper if they were not so corrupt. Hillary’s gatekeeper was needed to silence talk about degenerates, theft, treason, and every other foul deed the federal government gets up to these days.
We are all going to have to rethink how we deal with this, because there are all these competing values ... Without any kind of editing function or gatekeeping function, what does it mean to have the right to defend your reputation?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1491134/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1491134/posts
It wasn’t so much a matter of hiring a gatekeeper, it was more a matter of which bureaucracy provided the gatekeeper with the authority to override the First Amendment. It looks like Ann Ravel over at the Federal Elections Commission got the job. Notice that in 1998 an Internet gatekeeper was needed to protect reputations. Somewhere along the way the gatekeeper’s duties grew to include this:
. . . if the new anti-First Amendment ploy by the vice-chairwoman of the Federal Election Commission, Ann Ravel, becomes a federal regulation, the ad would be regulated regardless of whether I paid to run it. And so would be the content on this website. Blogs, YouTube, and everything else the Internet reaches would fall under the FEC’s jurisdiction. The FEC will eagerly invade all political speech online, paid or unpaid, even the content of the news and opinion articles like the ones we read every day.
A quick look at arming federal bureaucrats tells us that Hillary’s gatekeeper(s) will end up carrying guns!
Considering all of the unpunished campaign contributions larceny and stolen elections Democrats get away with, this question takes on some importance:
. . . we have to go back to the beginning and ask why there should be a Federal Election Commission at all.
Dissolve the Federal Election Commission
The First Amendment is unambiguous.
By Jed Babbin – 10.27.14
http://spectator.org/articles/60771/dissolve-federal-election-commission
The First Amendment is unambiguous.
By Jed Babbin – 10.27.14
http://spectator.org/articles/60771/dissolve-federal-election-commission
Why indeed! A police force staffed by deaf, dumb, and blind cops does a helluva lot more to enforce the law than ever did the FEC.
And once again the filthy lying sneaks act like they are morally superior to America’s Founding Fathers:
First Amendment
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.
Make no mistake on this issue. Abolishing the First Amendment will be accomplished by one or anther piece of moral garbage. If you doubt it look at all of the moral filth that is used to justify oppressive government; i.e., take liberties away from productive Americans for the common good.
In the same vein the First Amendment guarantees freedom of speech to everyone while:
Freedom of the press is guaranteed only to those who own one. A. J. Liebling
Question: Why does freedom of the press NOT require an FEC gatekeeper? Answer: The press is an instrument of government.
In addition to the obvious answer, nobody in the federal government would need a gatekeeper if they were not so corrupt. Hillary’s gatekeeper was needed to silence talk about degenerates, theft, treason, and every other foul deed the federal government gets up to these days.
Last edited: