Free speech make way; here comes Obama-style regionalism

We have written about how “regionalism” and its handmaiden “Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing” (AFFH) are, in effect, an attempt by the left to dictate the way Americans will live. Now, we see that they also entail an attempt to tell elected officials what they must say. This has become apparent from efforts to muzzle Westchester Country Executive Rob Astorino.
Read more at Powerline Read More......

Feds Preparing to Undo ‘Citizens United’ by Forcing Disclosure of Donors to Conservative Groups

Two words that make foes of the First Amendment go crazy: Citizens" and "United."
Citizens United was the Supreme Court case that ruled the First Amendment applies to everyone: unions, individuals, and corporations supporting their interests through free speech. But the Federal Election Commission has started the process to undo the Citizens United case - and only one day remains for Americans to provide comments asking the FEC to respect the First Amendment.


Read more at PJ Media Read More......

Sen. Baldwin: 1st Amendment Doesn’t Apply to Individuals

Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) says the 1st Amendment’s religious liberty protections don’t apply to individuals. On MSNBC last week, Wisconsin’s junior Senator claimed that the Constitution’s protection of the free exercise of religion extends only to religious institutions, and that individual’s do not have a right to the free exercise of their own religion.


Read more at Media Trackers Read More......

In Praise of Pamela Geller

How can any thinking and civilized person ever believe there is a wisp of truth to the proposition: "There are times when it is 'understandable' that people would slaughter others because of a cartoon"? Everyone who follows world events in the United States, regardless of their political leanings, has seen the unimaginably vile actions of ISIS against "unbelievers" and "those who defame the prophet." How can anyone take their side? To do so even to the smallest extent renders the defender equally vile. And yet, of course, that is what we have come to in the cesspool that is the American left.


Read more at American Digest Read More......

The Attack On The First Amendment Isn't New -- Employers Have Been Silenced Since The 30s

Over the last several years, Americans have seen a frightening rise in hostility to freedom of speech. Much of that has occurred on college campuses, where we find that many students, faculty members, and administrators do not want free speech, but only speech that they agree with.
That is not, however, a new phenomenon. Since the enactment of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) in 1935, employers have had to operate in a legal environment that’s hostile to free speech. They can find themselves in trouble for saying things that union advocates and their bureaucratic allies don’t like.


Read more at Forbes Read More......

Cruz calls Democrats campaign finance amendment 'most radical proposal' he's seen in Senate

Cruz: Dems Want To Give Congress The Power To Ban Books - Sen. Ted Cruz (R., Texas) gave an impassioned speech on the Senate floor Tuesday night, arguing against the proposed Democratic constitutional amendment that would allow Congress to regulate campaign spending. ✧ Cruz said the the amendment’s broad grant of authority to regulate the use of money to influence elections could stretch to banning books, movies, and restricting the activity of organizations like the NAACP. ✧ “In the Democratic Senate of 2014, citizens’ free speech rights are tools for partisan warfare,” said Cruz.

Read more (or watch the video) at Washington Free Beacon Read More......

Rewriting the First Amendment

A standard liberal talking point about the Tea Party is that its constitutional designs are "extremist." But you will search in vain for any Tea Party proposal that is anywhere close to as radical as the current drive by mainstream Democrats to rewrite the Bill of Rights. The Supreme Court's Citizens United decision allowing unions and corporations to donate to independent political groups has driven liberals to such fits that they now want to amend the First Amendment. At a Senate Rules Committee meeting last week, New York Democrat Chuck Schumer announced a proposal to amend the Constitution to empower government to regulate political speech.

Read more at the Wall Street Journal Read More......

Re-education at George Mason

By Walter E. Williams - This week begins my 34th year serving on George Mason University's distinguished economics faculty. You might imagine my surprise when I received a letter from its Office of Equity and Diversity Services notifying me that I was required to "complete the in-person Equal Opportunity and Prevention of Sexual Harassment Policies and Procedures training." This is a leftist agenda for indoctrination, thought control and free speech suppression to which I shall refuse to submit. Let's look at it.

Ideas such as equity and equal opportunity, while having high emotional value, are vacuous analytical concepts. For example, I've asked students whether they plan to give every employer an equal opportunity to hire them when they graduate. To a person, they always answer no. If they aren't going to give every employer an equal opportunity to hire them, what's fair about forcing employers to give them an equal opportunity to be hired?

I'm guilty of gross violation of equality of opportunity, racism and possibly sexism. Back in 1960, when interviewing people to establish a marital contract, every woman wasn't given an equal opportunity. I discriminated against not only white, Indian, Asian, Mexican and handicapped women but men of any race. My choices were confined to good-looking black women. You say, "Williams, that kind of discrimination doesn't harm anyone!" Nonsense! When I married Mrs. Williams, other women were harmed by having a reduced opportunity set.

George Mason's Office of Equity and Diversity Services has far more challenging equity and diversity work than worrying about the re-education of Professor Williams. They must know that courts have long held that gross racial disparities are probative of a pattern and practice of discrimination. The most notable gross racial disparity on campus, and hence probative of discrimination, can be found on GMU's fabulous men's basketball team. Blacks are less than 9 percent of student enrollment but are 85 percent of our varsity basketball team and dominate its starting five.

It's not just GMU. Watch any Saturday afternoon college basketball game and ask yourself the question fixated in the minds of equity, diversity and inclusion hunters: Does this look like America? Among the 10 players on the court, at best there might be two white players. In 2010, 61 percent of Division I basketball players were black, and only 31 percent were white.

Allied with the purveyors of equity, diversity and inclusion are the multiculturalists, who call for the celebration of cultures. For them, all cultures are morally equivalent and to deem otherwise is Eurocentrism. That's unbridled nonsense. Ask your multiculturalist: Is forcible female genital mutilation, as practiced in nearly 30 sub-Saharan Africa and Middle Eastern countries, a morally equivalent cultural value? Slavery is practiced in Sudan and Niger; is that a cultural equivalent? In most of the Middle East, there are numerous limits on women - such as prohibitions on driving, employment, voting and education. Under Islamic law, in some countries, female adulterers face death by stoning, and thieves face the punishment of having their hand severed. Are these cultural values morally equivalent, superior or inferior to those of the West?

Western values are superior to all others. Why? The greatest achievement of the West was the concept of individual rights. The Western transition from barbarism to civility didn't happen overnight. It emerged feebly - mainly in England, starting with the Magna Carta of 1215 - and took centuries to get where it is today.

One need not be a Westerner to hold Western values. A person can be Chinese, Japanese, Jewish, African or Arab and hold Western values. It's no accident that Western values of reason and individual rights have produced unprecedented health, life expectancy, wealth and comfort for the ordinary person.

Western values are under ruthless attack by the academic elite on college campuses across America. They want to replace personal liberty with government control and replace equality before the law with entitlement. The multiculturalism and diversity agenda is a cancer on our society, and our tax dollars and charitable donations are supporting it.

Walter E. Williams is a professor of economics at George Mason University. To find out more about Walter E. Williams and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate Read More......

Contentions: Senate Republicans Turn Against SOPA/PIPA

Commentary Magazine/Contentions, 1/18/2012 by Alana Goodman - Today’s [Wednesday's] Internet blackout protesting the SOPA/PIPA bills – which would allow the federal government to shut down accused copyright violators online without due process – is already making an impact. Legislators who support the bills are being barraged with angry phone calls, and this morning Sen. Marco Rubio withdrew his co-sponsorship of the PIPA legislation...
[...]
This comes after six Republican senators sent a letter to Sen. Harry Reid distancing themselves from the bill and asking him to postpone the vote:

“We have increasingly heard from a large number of constituents and other stakeholders with vocal concerns about possible unintended consequences of the proposed legislation, including breaches in cybersecurity, damaging the integrity of the Internet, costly and burdensome litigation, and dilution of First Amendment rights,” said Sens. Chuck Grassley​ (R-Iowa), Orrin Hatch​ (R-Utah), Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), John Cornyn​ (R-Texas), Mike Lee (R-Utah) and Tom Coburn​ (R-Okla.) in the letter.

Sens. Cornyn, Sessions and Coburn previously backed the bill, and Sens. Grassley and Hatch are co-sponsors. Read more at Commentary... (may require a subscription) Read More......

WSJ: Court Tosses Out FCC Rules to Curb Indecent Speech

A federal appeals court threw out the FCC's rules on indecent speech Tuesday, in a big win for broadcasters that could lead to a new Supreme Court test of the government's power to control what is said on television and radio. Read more at Wall Street Journal... Read More......

Special Session: Employer gag bill update

OregonWatchdog.com - The [Oregon] House Business Committee will introduce yet another re-write of the “employer gag bill,” again at the behest of the AFL-CIO. This is the second re-write in addition to the passage of the original SB 519 last year. The new bill will expand the political content that employers are prohibited from discussing with employees to include ballot measures. However, the new bill will specify that employers are allowed to hold mandatory meetings on such things as workplace safety and other topics directly related to the job. AOI’s legal counsel has assured AOI that the new bill will not sidetrack our pending federal lawsuit challenging the validity of SB 519.

AOI’s lawsuit against SB 519 (2009) is progressing toward a hearing for Summary Judgment in early April in federal court in Portland. AOI, in conjunction with the US Chamber of Commerce, is challenging SB 519 as an illegal intrusion on federal labor law as well as an unconstitutional abridgement of an employer’s First Amendment free speech rights.

See reports on three additional business related bills at OregonBusinessReport.com. Read More......

President Obama, you are frightening us.

John Eidson of Tea Party Warrior: BREAKING NEWS, 9/16/09 – White House monitoring personal data on social networking sites. Read more here. ∴ Who are we? We are the tens of millions of people who didn’t vote for you, plus an increasing number of those who did, but have since realized that you aren’t governing as the post partisan moderate you said you were. Below are a few of the things you’re either doing or tacitly supporting that are frightening us, and we respectfully ask that you provide us with believable answers that address these concerns.

Do you plan to silence political dissent?
You say vigorous debate is good for the country, yet you make disparaging remarls about Fox News and people like Rush Limbaugh. You raise no objections when your supporters maliciously accuse conservatives on radio and TV of engaging in “hate speech:. Surely, you don’t agree with that absurd assessment. Or do you? Are you aware that your chief diversity officer at the FCC has spoken in favor of eliminating any media that doesn’t toe the government line? You say that you support the First Amendment, but will you allow the FCC to take away our right to watch and listen to anyone we please?

The backdoor silencing of political dissent?
Mark Lloyd, President Obama’s Chief Diversity Officer at the FCC, speaks glowing admiration of Hugo Chavez, the self-avowed communist strongman of Venezuela. Lloyd’s own words reveal that he fully supports the harsh measures taken by Chavez to achievw ironclad control of the Venezuelan government, including the takeover of privately-owned media.

For years, the American far-left has siught to use the so-called “Fairness Doctrine” as a means of silencing conservative dissent expressed over public airwaves. But because the Fairness Doctrine is counter to the cherished American liberty of free speech, Lloyd apparently plans to use the FCC’s controversial concepts of “diversity” and “locakism” as an under-the-radar means of silencing political dissent on radio and TV. See a video about Lloyd that includes his own words here.

Do you intend to confiscate guns?
Pending legislation would make ownership of unregistered firearms illegal. Guns cannot be confiscated unless their whereabouts are known, aa fact that makes gun registration a possible pretext for gun confiscation. During the campaign, you said you weren’t going to take away anybody’s guns. If you meant what you said, why haven’t you spoken out against the gun registration bills in Congress? Until you do, please understand why we fear that your true intent may be to take away our 2nd Amendment rights.

Why on earth are you creating a civilian national security force as powerful as our military?
There has not been a terrorist attack in America since 9/11, much less ehough to justify a powerful civilian security force. We respectfully ask that you tell us why you are building this force. What threat do you see? Is it people like us? Until you give us believable answers, please understand why we fear that the purpose of this force could be to shut down the kind of peaceful political dissent that we lave expressed at tea parties, town hall meetings and the 9/12 March on Washington.

When people fear their government, there is tyranny. – Thomas Jefferson

Read More......