Who needs the First Amendment?
Once again, Queen Nancy Pelosi let slip her utter and complete contempt for the Constitution. This time, she wants to propose an amendment, (A first for her. Normally she just ignores the Constitution), rewriting the First Amendment.
So what changes does San Fran Nan want to make? First, let’s review the 1st 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.
Short, sweet, easy for anyone to understand and to the point. Most people like the 1s Amendment. Most. There are a number of people who hate certain parts of it. Freedom of religion has been under attack by the Atheists and their Liberal, Progressive Democrat minions for decades. Free speech, the part we’re concerned with in this post, is hated by politicians, and liberals, progressives and Democrats. (Not that there is much difference between the bunch)
So what set off San Fran Nan and her wish to revoke amend the constitution? In 2010 the Supreme Court in the Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission1 decision ruled that Corporations have the right of free speech. This sent the communists liberals into a blind panic. How DARE the USSC assume that CORPORATIONS have any rights at ALL, let ALONE the right to speak out against their betters!!
This decision, which basically began the process of rolling back all the laws passed to restrict how people and groups could influence elections. Since communists democrats hate private enterprise, business and their subjects the people spending their own money on helping politicians who might actually mirror the thoughts of their constituents, this had to be stopped and stopped now.
The process began during the State of the Union address by President Obama the ScoamF when he attacked the court and the decision in front of Congress, the nation and the justices who were sitting front and center. This statement by the Dogeater in Chief so stunned the justices that Justice Alito, in a subconscious moment, mouthed the words “Not True!” which set off yet another round of attacks by the left.2
The upshot of this decision was the large amounts of money corporations poured into the 2010 midterm elections. The result of that election was the biggest turnover of seats in recent history in the favor of the Republicans.
So what exactly does the former Speaker of the house and current senior thundercunt want to do? Here are San Fran Nan’s own words, curtesy of CNSNEWS.com:
“We have a clear agenda in this regard: Disclose, reform the system reducing the role of money in campaigns, and amend the Constitution to rid it of this ability for special interests to use secret, unlimited, huge amounts of money flowing to campaigns,” Pelosi said at her Thursday press briefing.
“I think one of the presenters [at a Democratic forum on amending the Constitution] yesterday said that the Supreme Court had unleashed a predator that was oozing slime into the political system, and that, indeed, is not an exaggeration,” said Pelosi. “Our Founders had an idea. It was called democracy. It said elections are determined by the people, the voice and the vote of the people, not by the bankrolls of the privileged few. This Supreme Court decision flies in the face of our Founders’ vision and we want to reverse it.”
Queen Pelosi is known for not having any understanding of the constitution, American history or a grasp on reality. Her statements are dead opposite of what the founders had in mind. She is one of those who thinks the elites should rule and their inferiors, (The people), should just do as they are told.
Queen Nancy had a number of her minions lined up with her to provide cover for her stupid idea stand shoulder to shoulder in a united front for her proposal:
At Wednesday’s forum, a number of House and Senate Democrats were joined by representatives from People for the American Way and Common Cause in declaring their dedication to enacting a constitutional amendment to restrict speech by corporations.
The participants noted that several members in both houses of Congress have offered various versions of an amendment to reverse Citizen United v. FEC and curb unwanted speech by corporations. Rep. Jim McGovern (D.-Mass.) is one of the members sponsoring an amendment. “I’ve introduced a People’s Rights Amendment, which is very simple and straightforward,” Rep. Jim McGovern (D.-Mass.) said at the forum. “It would make clear that all corporate entities, for-profit and non-profit alike, are not people with constitutional rights.
The key phrase here is “Unwanted Speech.” So what other closet totalitarians are trying suppress freedom?
Rep. Donna Edwards (D.-Md.) explained the basic principle this move to amend the Constitution is advancing.
“In Citizens United, what the court said is that Congress has no authority to regulate this kind of political speech,” said Edwards. “And so all of these constitutional amendments go to this question of giving Congress the authority that the Supreme Court, I think wrongly, decided isn’t within Congress’s constitutional–our constitutional purview.
In other words, “How DARE they restrict MY power? Who do they think they are?”
So, what do you think an Amendment to the Constitution proposed by these morons would look like? The original amendment was 45 words. Considering Queen Nancy’s recent history, along with all those other geniuses working for her when she was speaker, the Amendment to remove replace the current 1st Amendment will be 2000 pages of text and that the Congress and the states will need to “Pass it to know what’s in it.”
Yeah, that worked out real well with Obamacare didn’t it you dried out old hag?
Actually the proposed amendment is actually rather short. Here’s the text from Free Speech for People: (A misnamed organization if there ever was one Ed.)
Section 1. We the people who ordain and establish this Constitution intend the rights protected by this Constitution to be the rights of natural persons.
Section 2. People, person, or persons as used in this Constitution does not include corporations, limited liability companies or other corporate entities established by the laws of any state, the United States, or any foreign state, and such corporate entities are subject to such regulation as the people, through their elected state and federal representatives, deem reasonable and are otherwise consistent with the powers of Congress and the States under this Constitution.
Section 3. Nothing contained herein shall be construed to limit the people’s rights of freedom of speech, freedom of the press, free exercise of religion, and such other rights of the people, which rights are inalienable.
One of the problems that is mentioned is that such an amendment would also affect the media, small businesses and even individuals. Again, from CNSNEWS:
Television and radio networks, newspapers, publishing houses, movie studios and think tanks, as well as political action committees, are usually organized as, or elements of, corporations.
William Teach, posting on Right Wing News added a few others that would be affected:
So are unions. And organizations like MoveOn.org, Media Matters, and the Center for American Progress. La Raza. NAACP. Project Vote. The list keeps going on and on.
Blogs would likewise be exposed to regulation by the Central Government. That includes liberal blogs. Many could charitably be called “corporations” via this amendment. Free speech could be restricted for anyone who works for a corporation. The imprecision of the language of the proposed amendment leaves it up to the states and federal government to provide definitions. The GOP should make the Democrats put their money where their mouths are and force a vote in the Senate and the House on this, because, really, Democrats have no real intention to do anything more than talk about this proposed amendment: it’s a way of rallying the base and creating chaos.
I think that would be a great idea. Not only let these blithering, idiotic totalitarians propose their amendment to suppress free speech, make sure that they have to go on record with their vote. I would also make sure that they know just how much damage this would do to their own base of support. All that nice Union money would dry up and go away. *evil grin*
There’s no way this sort of amendment would make it out of congress. It requires a 2/3rd’s majority in both houses of congress and then ratified by 3/4th’s of the States. There is no way this piece of legislative drek would make it through both houses by the required margins, let alone through enough state legislatures to become part of the Constitution. I can think of only a few states that would pass this and those are the ones controlled by the Democrats. You can tell which ones those are. They’re all bankrupt.
As I’ve said in the past and as I will say again, these scum need to go. Remember in November!
~The Angry Webmaster~