{"id":16251,"date":"2014-10-25T15:18:01","date_gmt":"2014-10-25T19:18:01","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/angry.net\/blog2\/?p=16251"},"modified":"2021-01-24T16:31:49","modified_gmt":"2021-01-24T21:31:49","slug":"democrats-once-again-move-to-end-free-speech","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/angry.net\/blog2\/?p=16251","title":{"rendered":"Democrats once again move to end free speech"},"content":{"rendered":"

Good day all. This story came out yesterday during the Friday night document dump so loved by government bureaucracies everywhere. In this case, it is the Federal Election Commission once again trying to suppress free speech on the internet.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

This was a surprise move late Friday when the Democrats on the FEC announced they wanted to add massive new regulations for internet campaigning. They want to go after blogs and even news sites and basically censor them. Here are some of the details from The Washington Examiner<\/a>:<\/p>\n

In a surprise move late Friday, a key Democrat on the Federal Election Commission called for burdensome new rules on Internet-based campaigning, prompting the Republican chairman to warn that Democrats want to regulate online political sites and even news media like the Drudge Report<\/a>. <\/i><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

\"constitution-burning.jpeg\"<\/a><\/p>\n

The fact that the Progressive Liberal Fascist Democrats want to censor the Drudge Report is old news. They\u2019ve hated him since he blew the whistle on the Clinton\/Lewinsky coverup almost 20 years ago.<\/p>\n

Democratic FEC Vice Chair Ann M. Ravel announced plans to begin the process to win regulations on Internet-based campaigns and videos, currently free from most of the FEC\u2019s rules. \u201cA reexamination of the commission\u2019s approach to the internet and other emerging technologies is long over due,\u201d she said. <\/i><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

\"Barking<\/a><\/p>\n

A quick search of that highly accurate source of information, Wikipedia gives a brief synopsis<\/a> of Comrade Ravel. She is a classic PFLD Moonbat and took her position a year ago. Apparently, she and the other two Communists<\/i><\/span> Nazi\u2019s<\/i><\/span> Democrats were rather annoyed when thy tried to suppress an anti-Obama internet video.<\/p>\n

The power play followed a deadlocked 3-3 vote on whether an Ohio anti-President Obama Internet campaign featuring two videos violated FEC rules when it did not report its finances or offer a disclosure on the ads. The ads were placed for free on YouTube and were not paid advertising. <\/i><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Anyone can upload a video to Youtube and it has literally thousands of internet political ads from one side or the other. I\u2019ve posted links to a few myself on this site. What Ravel and the other two want to do is change a rule regarding free ads like this.<\/p>\n

Under a 2006 FEC rule, free political videos and advocacy sites have been free of regulation in a bid to boost voter participation in politics. Only Internet videos that are placed for a fee on websites, such as the <\/i>Washington Examiner<\/i><\/em>, are regulated just like normal TV ads. <\/i><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

And what is it Ravel is trying to accomplish? I\u2019ll give you three guesses but you will only need one.<\/p>\n

Ravel\u2019s statement suggests that she would regulate right-leaning groups like America Rising that posts anti-Democrat YouTube videos on its website. <\/i><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

And from that you can bet she and her cohorts in unconstitutional activities would not move to suppress anything from the Democrat side of the house. Just how bad could these regulations be if allowed to go forward?<\/p>\n

FEC Chairman Lee E. Goodman, a Republican, said if regulation extends that far, then anybody who writes a political blog, runs a politically active news site or even chat room could be regulated. He added that funny internet campaigns like \u201cObama Girl,\u201d and \u201cJib Jab\u201d would also face regulations. <\/i>\u201cI told you this was coming,\u201d he told Secrets. Earlier this year he warned that Democrats on the panel were gunning for conservative Internet sites like the Drudge Report. <\/i><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Since I tend to get rather political on this site, you can bet your bottom dollar that these thugs would be coming after me as well. According to the Washington Times<\/a>, is afraid that major players might take advantage of the stupid sheep, I mean the voters.<\/p>\n

Ms. Ravel<\/a> said she fears that in trying to keep the Internet open for bloggers, they\u2019ve instead created a loophole for major political players to escape some scrutiny. <\/i><\/p>\n

\u201cSome of my colleagues seem to believe that the same political message that would require disclosure if run on television should be categorically exempt from the same requirements when placed in the Internet alone,\u201d said FEC<\/a> Vice Chair Ann M. Ravel<\/a> in a statement. \u201cAs a matter of policy, this simply does not make sense.\u201d <\/i><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

You\u2019re right, so how about this? How about we strip the FEC of most of it\u2019s authority? All they can do is insure that the elections are fair, honest and open and that no voter fraud occurs. Oh wait. They whole purpose of the Federal Elections Commission is to suppress anyone who gets in the way of the PLFD and other statists. Never mind.<\/p>\n

She said the FEC should no longer \u201cturn a blind eye to the Internet\u2019s growing force in the political arena,\u201d and she vowed to force a conversation next year on what changes to make. <\/i><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

\"liberalismjealousgod1\"<\/a><\/p>\n

How about we, the People, tell this tyrannical totalitarian bitch and her to minions that if they try and suppress the First Amendment, then they might just find out why the Second Amendment was written. Fortunately, the Republicans on the commission are having none of this.<\/p>\n

The three Republican-backed commissioners, though, said in a joint statement that Ms. Ravel<\/a>\u2019s plans would stifle what\u2019s become the \u201cvirtual free marketplace of political ideas and democratic debate.\u201d <\/i><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Since when have Democrats believe in honest and open debate?<\/p>\n

FEC<\/a> Chairman Lee E. Goodman<\/a> said what Ms. Ravel<\/a> is proposing would require a massive bureaucracy digging into the corners of the web to police what\u2019s posted about politics. <\/i><\/p>\n

\u201cI cannot imagine a regulatory regime that would put government censors on the Internet daily, culling YouTube video posts for violations of law \u2014 nothing short of a Chinese censorship board,\u201d Mr. Goodman<\/a> said. <\/i><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

\"1984-Big-Brother-Poster\"<\/a><\/p>\n

And that is exactly what those PLFD\u2019s have in mind Mr. Goodman. The Democrats have been the party of tyranny going back to Woodrow Wilson. Since the 1960\u2019s, they have moved hard to the Anti-democratic left, pushing forward laws and regulations, all designed to suppress any and all individuals and organizations that do not toe the Progressive Totalitarian line.<\/p>\n

The Internet, and before that, AM Talk Radio, began to break the choke-hold held by the Progressives. Prior to the Internet, and back when they had the Fairness Doctrine<\/a> in place, anyone who opposed the move toward the statist totalitarianism of the Democrats, (And to a great extent the RINO\u2019s as well), was essentially blocked from speaking out. Most of the news organizations ignored Conservatives and those who supported the Constitution as it was written.<\/p>\n

With the end of the Fairness Doctrine and the advents of Talk Radio and then the Internet, the dead hand of Progressive control slipped off. We have seen a huge amount of debate and discussion on the Internet. No longer are the Conservatives, Libertarians and Constitutionalists blocked from speaking out. No longer do we only hear one side of a story. Today, the Internet along with mobile devices with cameras built in, anyone can say pretty much anything they like.<\/p>\n

Such as myself.<\/p>\n

It\u2019s time to drive a stake through the heart of the Federal Election Commission. In it\u2019s current form, it serves no purpose at all other then to threaten the very freedoms we enjoy.<\/p>\n

\"chuck<\/a><\/p>\n

Thatisall<\/p>\n

~The Angry Webmaster~<\/b><\/i><\/p>\n

[yasr_visitor_votes size=”medium”]<\/p>\n

\n
\n
\n

Conservative Media, Blogs, Internet Now Under Attack by …<\/h3>\n<\/div>\n
The latest is a plan by the FEC to regulate online political sites to include conservative media like Drudge and Sean Hannity. All blogs, videos, and Internet sites would be affected. Democratic FEC Vice Chair Ann M. Ravel wants regulations to treat them like PACs. Until now they have …. He quoted the ACLU’s stance on the issue, which is that the proposal would, \u201cseverely limit the First Amendment and lead directly to government censorship of political speech.\u201d \u201cCitizens United was a …<\/div>\n
http:\/\/www.independentsentinel.com\/ \u2014 Sat, 25 Oct 2014 06:40:41 -0700<\/span><\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
\n

Humboldt Republican Women: Dems on FEC move to …<\/a><\/h3>\n<\/div>\n
Ravel’s statement suggests that she would regulate right-leaning groups like America Rising that posts anti-Democrat YouTube videos on its website. FEC Chairman Lee E. Goodman, a Republican, said if regulation extends that far, then …<\/div>\n
http:\/\/www.hrwf-ca.org\/<\/a> \u2014 Fri, 24 Oct 2014 19:06:00 -0700<\/span><\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
\n

Playing Chicken with the FEC | Wyoming Liberty Group<\/a><\/h3>\n<\/div>\n
Unfortunately, both the Wyoming federal court and the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit basically ruled as the attorneys for the FEC asked them to, essentially saying the standards aren’t that important because it’s just disclosure. … Parroting reform rhetoric about \u201cdark money,\u201d the statement of reasons from Vice Chair Ann Ravel, Commissioner Steven Walther and Commissioner Ellen Weintraub ignores legal precedents these commissioners don’t like to justify …<\/div>\n
http:\/\/wyliberty.org\/<\/a> \u2014 Thu, 31 Jul 2014 10:43:36 -0700<\/span><\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
\n

Complaint Against ‘Illegal’ Electioneering by Rove’s ‘Non …<\/a><\/h3>\n<\/div>\n
But, now, documents issued by the GOP-appointed Commissioners after two Democratic appointees, including Ravel, refused to vote to defend the FEC’s action in court, reveal they are willing to turn the truth upside down in order to continue a …<\/div>\n
http:\/\/www.bradblog.com\/<\/a> \u2014 Thu, 31 Jul 2014 05:35:32 -0700<\/span><\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
\n

Mudslinging At The FEC Over Disclosure …<\/a><\/h3>\n<\/div>\n
\u201cCommissioner Ravel has gone to extraordinary and unprecedented lengths to try to censor presentation of the agency’s rationale for its prosecutorial decision in the Crossroads GPS matter,\u201d they continued. The blistering four-page statement …<\/div>\n
http:\/\/www.popularresistance.org\/<\/a> \u2014 Tue, 29 Jul 2014 06:24:56 -0700<\/span><\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
\n

More Rows at the FEC – – Soft Money Hard Law<\/a><\/h3>\n<\/div>\n
The conflict in this instance involved Commissioner Ravel on one side and all of the Republican commissioners on the other, and they swiped at each other in strong terms over the properly defined responsibility of FEC Commissioners and the role of courts. … They objected to the abstention vote as a break from Commission practice, and have depicted it as an attempt to \u201ccensor presentation of the agency’s rationale for its prosecutorial discretion in the Crossroads matter.\u201d.<\/div>\n
http:\/\/www.moresoftmoneyhardlaw.com\/<\/a> \u2014 Mon, 14 Apr 2014 06:16:15 -0700<\/span><\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
\n

Post-McCutcheon political law links | Political Activity Law …<\/a><\/h3>\n<\/div>\n
MCCUTCHEON V. FEC. SCOTUS (PDF). AGGREGATE LIMITS STRUCK. WP. \u201cOn its face, the ruling seems far more limited than Citizens United, which has dramatically increased spending on elections and spawned a new wave of political organizations funded by wealthy individuals … It takes a particularly warped view of the relationship between citizen and state to conclude that justice and fairness require the censorship of those who would criticize men and women of great power.<\/div>\n
http:\/\/politicalactivitylaw.com\/<\/a> \u2014 Wed, 02 Apr 2014 16:57:03 -0700<\/span><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Good day all. This story came out yesterday during the Friday night document dump so loved by government bureaucracies everywhere. In this case, it is the Federal Election Commission once again trying to suppress free speech on the internet. Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"advanced_seo_description":"","jetpack_seo_html_title":"","jetpack_seo_noindex":false,"jetpack_seo_schema_type":"","footnotes":"","jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[37,100,71,8,115,219,35],"tags":[52,12,222,8,23,24,27,31],"class_list":["post-16251","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-liberty-politics","category-moonbat","category-news-of-the-day","category-politics","category-stupidity-crime","category-the-good-idea-fairy","category-tyranny","tag-constitution","tag-freedom","tag-good-idea-fairy","tag-politics","tag-slavery","tag-socialism","tag-totalitarianism","tag-youtube"],"views":1762,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":20874,"url":"https:\/\/angry.net\/blog2\/?p=20874","url_meta":{"origin":16251,"position":0},"title":"Democrats try to suppress free speech","author":"Angry Webmaster","date":"April 8, 2016","format":false,"excerpt":"Good day all. This is almost a standing headline these days. In this case, it was the three Democrat members of the Federal Election Commission who decided that any conservative speech must be suppressed. The FEC is split between three Democrat and three Republican members. The Democrats on the commission\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "History"","block_context":{"text":"History","link":"https:\/\/angry.net\/blog2\/?cat=5"},"img":{"alt_text":"constitution, Void where prohibited by Obama","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/angry.net\/blog2\/wp-content\/uploads\/2013\/01\/constitution-Void-where-prohibited-by-Obama.jpg?resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":21712,"url":"https:\/\/angry.net\/blog2\/?p=21712","url_meta":{"origin":16251,"position":1},"title":"Hillary Clinton plans to repeal the 1st Amendment","author":"Angry Webmaster","date":"July 16, 2016","format":false,"excerpt":"Good day all. Back in 2010, the Supreme Court did something right and upheld the 1st Amendment rights of companies. The case came about because the Federal Elections Commission wanted to suppress a film about Hillary Clinton.","rel":"","context":"In "History"","block_context":{"text":"History","link":"https:\/\/angry.net\/blog2\/?cat=5"},"img":{"alt_text":"Stock Photo of the Consitution of the United States and Feather Quill","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/angry.net\/blog2\/wp-content\/uploads\/2013\/07\/constitution-300x198.jpg?resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":34906,"url":"https:\/\/angry.net\/blog2\/?p=34906","url_meta":{"origin":16251,"position":2},"title":"Democrats subverting the Federal Elections Commission","author":"Angry Webmaster","date":"July 9, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Good day all. The Federal Elections Commission, (FEC), was set up following the Watergate scandal. It was meant to handle campaign finance laws and violations thereof. It has 6 members on it, 3 Republicans and 3 Democrats. This balance was designed to protect those accused of campaign finance violations from\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Crime"","block_context":{"text":"Crime","link":"https:\/\/angry.net\/blog2\/?cat=3"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/i.pinimg.com\/originals\/42\/c4\/41\/42c4413852f49846079a2a0ba42a58b5.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":18641,"url":"https:\/\/angry.net\/blog2\/?p=18641","url_meta":{"origin":16251,"position":3},"title":"FEC still wants to censor the Internet","author":"Angry Webmaster","date":"August 7, 2015","format":false,"excerpt":"Good day all. Last year I wrote a post on how the Federal Elections Commission, headed by Ann M. Ravel, wanted to start censoring political speech on the Internet. Never ones to let a bad idea go away, they are looking at doing it again. These totalitarian knotheads, primarily Democrats,\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "liberty"","block_context":{"text":"liberty","link":"https:\/\/angry.net\/blog2\/?cat=37"},"img":{"alt_text":"eye roll","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/angry.net\/blog2\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/07\/eye-roll-292x300.jpg?resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":24927,"url":"https:\/\/angry.net\/blog2\/?p=24927","url_meta":{"origin":16251,"position":4},"title":"Democrats still trying to suppress free speech Pt. 1 gazillion","author":"Angry Webmaster","date":"September 15, 2017","format":false,"excerpt":"Good day all. For the past few years, the Democrats on the Federal Elections Commission have been demanding the right to suppress any web site with a political opinion if they didn\u2019t like what was being said. Interestingly, it was sites like the \u201cDrudge Report\u201d that they were looking at.\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "liberty"","block_context":{"text":"liberty","link":"https:\/\/angry.net\/blog2\/?cat=37"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/angry.net\/blog2\/wp-content\/uploads\/2012\/08\/democrats-party-of-tolerance-300x300.jpg?resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":29550,"url":"https:\/\/angry.net\/blog2\/?p=29550","url_meta":{"origin":16251,"position":5},"title":"New York City repeals 1st Amendment","author":"Angry Webmaster","date":"October 1, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Good day all. With all the news coming out on the Democrats plans to overthrow the elected government of the United States, this little gem from the New York City Commission on Human Rights was overlooked. It seems that this commission has a serious issue with freedom of speech, and\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Crime"","block_context":{"text":"Crime","link":"https:\/\/angry.net\/blog2\/?cat=3"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/angry.net\/blog2\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/document-dump-300x191.jpg?resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]}],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/angry.net\/blog2\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/16251","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/angry.net\/blog2\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/angry.net\/blog2\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/angry.net\/blog2\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/angry.net\/blog2\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=16251"}],"version-history":[{"count":8,"href":"https:\/\/angry.net\/blog2\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/16251\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":33572,"href":"https:\/\/angry.net\/blog2\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/16251\/revisions\/33572"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/angry.net\/blog2\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=16251"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/angry.net\/blog2\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=16251"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/angry.net\/blog2\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=16251"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}