Antiquated Freedom Of The Press

Discussion in 'US Constitution' started by Flanders, Dec 21, 2016.

  1. Flanders
    Offline

    Flanders ARCHCONSERVATIVE

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2010
    Messages:
    7,602
    Thanks Received:
    740
    Trophy Points:
    205
    Ratings:
    +2,016
    The Founders provided the method to abolish the Electoral Collage, but I have yet to hear a liberal call for a constitutional amendment:

    New York Times: End 'antiquated' Electoral College
    By Eddie Scarry
    12/20/16 9:08 AM

    New York Times: End 'antiquated' Electoral College

    Frankly, the country would improve immensely if freedom of the press was removed from the First Amendment. The press (print and electronic) does more harm to this country every week than the Electoral Collage did in over 200 years.
     
    • Funny and Agree!! Funny and Agree!! x 1
  2. fncceo
    Online

    fncceo Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2016
    Messages:
    2,208
    Thanks Received:
    344
    Trophy Points:
    150
    Ratings:
    +2,927
    I'm afraid you couldn't be more wrong.

    Freedoms are inherently risky ... the right to bear arms means that people can and will be hurt. The right to free speech can mean people can and will be misinformed.

    But, removal of those freedoms comes at a greater risk. An unarmed populace is at the mercy of evil men and women and a populace with only a single, sanctioned, source of news are only drones.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  3. Flanders
    Offline

    Flanders ARCHCONSERVATIVE

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2010
    Messages:
    7,602
    Thanks Received:
    740
    Trophy Points:
    205
    Ratings:
    +2,016
    To fncceo: You are mixing oranges and apples:

    America’s freedoms can live very well without freedom of the press, but the country will die without ABSOLUTE political freedom of speech. If conservative Americans want to protect the First Amendment I suggest eliminating these four words ——“or of the press” —— so it reads:

    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 the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

    XXXXX

    My point. The press would have to defend freedom of speech for everybody in every venue as a matter of self-interest instead of only defending press protection while feeding freedom of speech to Democrat wolves.​
    To fncceo: That is exactly what Americans had before freedom of speech took off on the Internet:

    My point. The press would have to defend freedom of speech for everybody in every venue as a matter of self-interest instead of only defending press protection while feeding freedom of speech to Democrat wolves.

    As I’ve said many times, Democrats had nothing to fear so long as freedom of speech was limited to soapbox orators and barroom pundits. Freedom of speech on the Internet is informing the public about the Democrat party’s tyrannical agenda, and about top Democrats, to more Americans than Democrats can live with.

    Bottom line: Freedom of speech’s continued growth on the Internet is a frightening prospect to Democrats; hence, they are reacting like cornered rats. Their hostile reaction is akin to Muslims learning on the Internet that Allah is not in their camp.

    Hillary Clinton Proves Fake News Is Newspeak
     
  4. fncceo
    Online

    fncceo Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2016
    Messages:
    2,208
    Thanks Received:
    344
    Trophy Points:
    150
    Ratings:
    +2,927
    Freedom of Speech is synonymous with Freedom of the Press. If you curtail one, you curtail the other. Letting someone (the someone in charge) decide what constitutes speech and what constitutes press is tantamount to censorship.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  5. Flanders
    Offline

    Flanders ARCHCONSERVATIVE

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2010
    Messages:
    7,602
    Thanks Received:
    740
    Trophy Points:
    205
    Ratings:
    +2,016
    To fncceo: Your understanding of the difference is sorely lacking.
    To fncceo: Your response is a standard liberal talking point —— broad without substance. It needs clarification which I am happy to provide.

    NOTE: Politically correct speech is censorship.

    I assume you missed this in the link I provided:


    Ms. Geller is talking about censorship. The problem is that censorship is a polite way of violating the First Amendment’s freedom of speech protection.

    XXXXX

    The public airwaves is a different matter. The airwaves is the difference between censorship and freedom of speech. Even there the owners of television transmitters decide what they will censor on the public airwaves. Pamela Geller’s piece shows that the Internet appears to be going down the same road.​

    Hillary Clinton Proves Fake News Is Newspeak

    Before the Internet the government controlled freedom of speech and freedom of the press with an iron hand. The press barons who owned the printing presses and the transmitters in their glory years censored the public with newspeak and omission. Even with the Internet just about every news story remains newspeak. This is a classic example of omission:

    Liberal media organizations like the Washington Post, New York Times and CNN have nevertheless kept their readers in the dark. By publishing time, none of the three had even acknowledged the appointments, much less their impact or the blowback from critics.​

    Media Blackout On Obama’s Last-Minute Civil Rights Appointments
    Peter Hasson
    Reporter, Associate Editor
    11:22 PM 12/20/2016

    Media Blackout On Obama’s Last-Minute Civil Rights Appointments

    Let me close with Bill O’Reilly talking about abolishing the Electoral College:

    “Talking points believes this is all about race.”

    XXXXX

    Very few commentators will tell you that the heart of liberalism in America is based on race.”​


    To be accurate the Democrat party is the Black party thriving on black racism thanks to the MSM:

    Black racists live for any reason that allows them to cite racism as the problem —— real or imagined. Black race hustlers of every stripe sell “We’s all God’s chillun.” as their best chance to take power short of violent revolution. Make no mistake about it. Absolute political power is what black racists are after; hence, every issue, every policy, every spoken word must be decided by black Americans. The truth is that black Americans represent just over 12 percent of the total population, yet they pretend they defend every non-white against those hate-filled white Americans.

    Confirmation Circus
     
  6. regent
    Offline

    regent Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2012
    Messages:
    8,575
    Thanks Received:
    941
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +2,000
    Just before Jefferson took office the conservative party, the Federalists, passed laws restricting freedom of speech. That was the end of the first conservative political party.
     
  7. miketx
    Offline

    miketx BANNED

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2015
    Messages:
    21,041
    Thanks Received:
    2,046
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Ratings:
    +22,868
    The right to keep and bear arms means no such thing.
     
  8. Flanders
    Offline

    Flanders ARCHCONSERVATIVE

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2010
    Messages:
    7,602
    Thanks Received:
    740
    Trophy Points:
    205
    Ratings:
    +2,016
    To regent: How in hell do you get conservative out of this?

    The Federalists called for a strong national government that promoted economic growth and fostered friendly relationships with Great Britain, as well as opposition to revolutionary France. The party controlled the federal government until 1801, when it was overwhelmed by the Democratic-Republican opposition led by Thomas Jefferson.

    Federalist Party - Wikipedia

    Jefferson proved that limited government promoted economic growth as well as promoting:

    Commerce with all nations, alliance with none, should be our motto. Thomas Jefferson

    XXXXX

    I am for free commerce with all nations, political connection with none, and little or no diplomatic establishment. And I am not for linking ourselves by new treaties with the quarrels of Europe, entering that field of slaughter to preserve their balance, or joining in the confederacy of Kings to war against the principles of liberty. Thomas Jefferson

    You went all the way back to the 1790s to mischaracterize conservatives. So it should be easy for you to characterize today’s Democrat party? Here is this conservative's characterization should you care to disagree:
    They are coming out of the closet:

    . . . the congressman’s bid has been complicated by questions about his views on Louis Farrakhan, the politics of Israel and black nationalism.

    XXXXX

    Additionally, he’s faced criticism for the lead role he played as a member of a Black Law Students Association, inviting black nationalist speakers to the University of Minnesota . . .

    Keith Ellison’s black nationalist past haunts bid to lead DNC
    By Seth McLaughlin
    Wednesday, December 21, 2016

    Keith Ellison’s black nationalist past haunts bid to lead DNC

    I would put this question to Ellison: How come black nationalism is a good thing while white nationalism is pure evil to global government Democrats?

    nationalism (noun)

    1. Devotion to the interests or culture of a particular nation.

    2. The belief that nations will benefit from acting independently rather than collectively, emphasizing national rather than international goals.

    3. Aspirations for national independence in a country under foreign domination.

    nationalist (noun)
    nationalistic (adjective)
    nationalistically (adverb)

    p.s. Ellison is forcing black racism out into the open. Should he get the job he can make black racism the Democrat party’s official policy. So hang in there bro! I would vote for you if I could.
     
  9. eflatminor
    Offline

    eflatminor Classical Liberal

    Joined:
    May 24, 2011
    Messages:
    9,927
    Thanks Received:
    1,545
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +2,830
    ^ This

    I agree you cannot have freedom of speech while government suppresses the press. Whether I call myself a reporter or just citizen, I should have the right to speak freely...if we are to be a free nation that is.
     
  10. Flanders
    Offline

    Flanders ARCHCONSERVATIVE

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2010
    Messages:
    7,602
    Thanks Received:
    740
    Trophy Points:
    205
    Ratings:
    +2,016
    My gal Judi wrote a nice piece about freedom much broader than the questionable freedom of the press. Judi reminded us that Madeleine Lebeau died this year:


    “If anyone needs to know what it means to lose your freedom, just look at that face, those eyes. That’s all you need to know.”

    Madeleine Lebeau, was so much more than a flickering image on a long ago film. Her New York Times obituary stated that she had “attained movie immortality with one scene, when the camera zoomed in on her tear-stained face as she sang “La Marseillaise” in “Casablanca”.

    But Ms. Lebeau, being real, attained so much more than “movie mortality”, immortalizing the very meaning of ‘Freedom’.​

    “Only those who have not had freedom truly cherish it”
    By Judi McLeod
    December 23, 2016

    “Only those who have not had freedom truly cherish it”
     

Share This Page