UNREAL… Take a Look At the People Who Think It Is Perfectly OK for Barack Obama to Repeal the Bill of Rights
CLUELESS IN AMERICA …
There is ignorant, and then there is damn ignorant. Those folks in the video below would be the latter. The individuals interviewed actually agreed that it would be okay for Barack Obama to repeal the Bill of Rights as a response to dealing with ISIS and the radical terror threat. Are you serious? Some thought because Republicans and Democrats agreed to do this, it was a good thing as they finally agreed on something. Just how uninformed and stupid have some become in America? I guess the next question that should have been asked was if any of the respondents knew what the Bill of Rights was, or if they could name any of them?
Beachgoers in San Diego blithely agreed that President Barack Obama should be given the power to completely repeal the Bill of Rights in the name of fighting ISIS in another disturbing insight into the unthinking malaise of many Americans.
Told by media analyst and author Mark Dice that Obama had announced he was to repeal the Bill of Rights in order to “help make sure that we can keep everybody safe here in the homeland,” almost all the respondents agreed that eliminating constitutional rights was perfectly reasonable.
Asked, “Is that the right decision – should we get behind Obama to make sure the ISIS threat doesn’t rear its head here in America?,” one man responded, “Yeah I would agree with that,” before adding, “Only time will tell whether it’s the right or wrong decision,” agreeing with Dice that Obama’s political advisors “know what’s best”.
Posted January 27, 2015 by Scared Monkeys
2nd Amendment, 5th Amendment, Barack Obama, Bill of Rights, Bizarre, First Amendment, Fourth Amendment, Freedom of Religion, Freedom of Speach, Freedom of the Press, Imperial President, ISIS, Second Amendment, US Constitution, WTF, You Tube - VIDEO | 2 comments
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) Speaks at the Iowa Freedom Summit … “Reigniting the Miracle of America” … We Need to Bring Together a Coalition of Americans Who Want to Believe Again in the “Miracle of America”.
SEN. TED CRUZ SPEAKS AT THE IOWA FREEDOM SUMMIT IN DES MOINES, IOWA …
Senator Ted Cruz, one of the few red blooded, true conservatives in the Republican party, wowed them this week at the Iowa Freedom. Cruz spoke of reigniting the Miracle of America. He asked how do we bring back the Miracle of America? Cruz answered his question by stating the following:
“Number one, we champion jobs and economic growth and opportunity. We bring back an environment where small businesses are growing, are creating opportunity and we get the senseless obstacles from Washington out of the way. That means tax reform, regulatory reform, it means sending the ‘locust’ of the EPA back to Washington. [...] And the most important regulatory reform we can do is repeal every word of Obamacare. We need tax reform and the most important tax reform we can do is to abolish the IRS. We need a simple flat tax that is fair that every Americans can fill his or hers taxes on a post card. There are 110,000 employees at the IRS. We need to padlock that building and put everyone of those 110,00 on our Southern border. I say that somewhat tongue-in-cheek, think about that for a second imagine you travel 1000′s of miles through Central America, through the heat, you’re swimming across the Rio Grande and the first thing you see is ten thousand IRS agents, you would turn around and go home too.
The second key to reigniting the Miracle of America is we need to defend our Constitutional rights. Every single one of them, the 1st Amendment, the 2nd Amendment, the 4th, the 5th, the 10th Amendment. You know no liberty has been more under assault in recent years than religious liberty. Whether it is the Federal government going after Hobby Lobby, a Christian company, or going after the Little Sisters of the Poor. By the way, here is a real good rule of thumb, if you are litigating against nuns, as the Obama administration is, you probably have done something wrong. I am sorry to say one of the most graphic examples of the threat of religious liberty occurred in my home town of Houston. Where the city of Houston subpoenaed five pastors and demanded of those pastors that they hand over their sermons and hand over your sermon notes. [...] The heat and pressure was so great that the city folded under it and withdrew the subpoena.
Third, we need to restore Americans leadership in the world. Over the past six years we have seen the fruits of the Obama/Clinton foreign policy of receding from leadership in the word. Leading from behind does not work. Just a couple of weeks ago we were horrified at the terrorist attack in the streets of Paris. And then horrified again when 40 world leaders came in solidarity and yet missing from that rally graphically was the United States of America. You cannot fight and win a war on radical Islamic terrorism if you are unwilling to utter the words radical Islamic terrorism. [...] You know that Paris also illustrates that a big ocean doesn’t mean we are protected from radical Islamic terrorism. It is one of the reasons why I have joined Steve King and Chuck Grassley to introduce the ‘Expatriate Terrorist Act’ that says if an American citizen takes up arms with ISIS, he forfeits his or her citizenship.”
Must see Video …
This is a must watch VIDEO from probably the greatest Conservative and defender of the US Constitution of all elected politicians in Washington, DC today. He ended his speech by saying the following when it comes to the upcoming primary season, every person is going to tell you that they are the most Conservative person to ever walk. Cruz said, “talk is cheap” and the Word tells us, “that you shall know them by their fruit”.Cruz went on to say:
One of the most important roles of Americans and the people of Iowa will be to look each candidate in the eye and say, “don’t talk, show me”. Ted Crud went on to say, “if you say you support liberty, show me where you stood up and fought for it. If you say you support religious liberty, show me where you stood up and fought for it. If you say you oppose Obamacare show me where you stood up and fought against it. If you say you oppose the president’s Unconstitutional executive amnesty, show me where you stood up and fought. If you say you support life and marriage show me where you stood up and fought. If you say you’ll stand up to the Washington establishment, the career politicians of both parties, that have gotten us into this mess, show me where you have stood up and fought. If you say you oppose common core, show me where you have stood up and fought. And if you say you stand with our friend and ally the nation of Israel show me where you stood up and fought.
Together, we need to reassemble the Reagan coalition. We need to unify, we need to bring together conservative and evangelicals and libertarians and Republican women and Reagan Democrats and young people. We need to bring together a coalition of Americans who want to believe again in the “Miracle of America”.
Sen. Ted Cruz spoke of reigniting the “Miracle of America”.
- This country was built on an extraordinary miracle. The miracle of American began with a revolutionary idea, Our rights do not come from government, they come from God Almighty.
- This country was built on incredible opportunity … There has been no country in the history of the world that has allowed so many millions with nothing to come and seek the unlimited dreams of their potential.
- The miracle of American as been American exceptionalism. We are the clarion voice for freedom and we will back down to no face of tyranny.
Sarah Palin launches her own on-line TV channel to eliminate the liberal media news filter and speak directly to the people. Subscribers to the Sarah Palin Channel will have the ability to post their own videos to the website, submit questions to her and participate in online video chats with her and other subscribers. Palin says, most importantly, I want you to talk directly to me. Palin says, the channel is more than just news, it is a community.
Go to Sarah Palin Channel and check it out for free.
The Sarah Palin Channel, which costs $9.95 per month or $99.95 for a one-year subscription, will feature her commentary on “important issues facing the nation,” as well as behind-the-scenes looks into her personal life as “mother, grandmother, wife and neighbor.” Palin serves as executive editor, overseeing all content posted to the channel.
“I want to talk directly to you on our channel, on my terms — and no need to please the powers that be,” Palin, who is also a Fox News contributor, said in a video announcing the channel. “Together, we’ll go beyond the sound bites and cut through the media’s politically correct filter.”
United States Patent & Trademark Office Cancels the Washington Redskins Trademark Registration … Says Football Team’s Name “Disparaging to Native Americans”
JUST CURIOUS, HOW WAS THE NAME “REDSKINS” CONSIDERED OK FOR 82 YEARS?
Don’t ask for things, you might just open Pandora’s box … The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office canceled the Washington Redskins’ trademark stating that Federal trademark law does not permit registration of trademarks that “may disparage” individuals or groups. However, the action does not prevent the NFL’s Washington Redskins from using the name, with no patent protection, the team could lose revenue from preventing others to produce and sell merchandise using the same name.
But of course it is only a coincidence that this issue has grown with the presence of a community agitator as president.
The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office canceled the Washington Redskins’ trademark registration on Wednesday, a move that won’t force the NFL team to change its name but fuels the intense fight by opponents to eliminate what they view as a racial slur against Native Americans.
The 99-page decision by the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board said the team’s name and logo are disparaging. It dilutes the Redskins’ legal protection against infringement and hinders the team’s ability to block counterfeit merchandise from entering the country.
But its effect is largely symbolic. The ruling cannot stop the team from selling T-shirts, beer glasses and license-plate holders with the moniker or keep the team from trying to defend itself against others who try to profit from the logo.
From Eugene Volokh at the WAPO: 2-to-1 decision, Blackhorse v. Pro Football, Inc. (USPTO TTAB June 18, 2014). A quick excerpt:
[T]hese registrations must be cancelled because they were disparaging to Native Americans at the respective times they were registered, in violation of Section 2(a) of the Trademark Act of 1946, 15 U.S.C. § 1052(a) [which bars, in relevant part, registrations of marks that "may disparage ... persons, living or dead, institutions, beliefs, or national symbols, or bring them into contempt, or disrepute"]. This decision concerns only the statutory right to registration under Section 2(a). We lack statutory authority to issue rulings concerning the right to use trademarks.
Hmm, so who is next, the Cleveland Indians? And those of you at Atlanta Brave games doing the “tomahawk chop” will be arrested and cited for a hate crime.
Legal Insurrection opines, if the “Redskins” trademark is cancelled by USPTO as “disparaging,” are “Negro” and “Colored” next? So does that mean the United Negro College Fund and National Association for the Advancement of Colored People should have their trademarks revoked?
Other names up for consideration, the Washington Scandals, Washington Tyranny, Washington PC’s, or my personal favorite the Washington Waste.
Texas Senator Ted Cruz Wins 2016 Presidential Straw Poll at a Republican Leadership Conference in New Orleans, Louisiana
If Ted Cruz is Constitutionally allowed to run for President … He will be a real threat to Democrats and establishment Republicans …
Texas Senator Ted Cruz won the 2016 Presidential straw poll at a Republican Leadership Conference in New Orleans, Louisiana. Cruz finished first with 30.33%, Dr. Ben Carson second with 29.38% and Kentucky Senator Rand Paul finished third with 10.43%. They were followed by former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee and Texas Governor Rick Perry rounded out the top five, at 5.06% and 4.90%, respectively. Moderate RINO’s Florida’s former Governor Jeb Bush came in 7th with 4.42% and New Jersey Governor Chris Christie came in dead last with 1.11%. During his speech Cruz said that Republicans would take back the Senate, they will retire Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-LA) and remove Harry Reid as Majority Leader.
Cruz finished in first place in the annual conference’s presidential straw poll at 30.33%. Dr. Ben Carson, a Fox News commentator and conservative activist, finished in second with 29.38% while Sen. Rand Paul, R-Kentucky, was third with 10.43%.
Fox News host and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee and Texas Governor Rick Perry rounded out the top five, at 5.06% and 4.90%, respectively.
Neither Carson nor Paul spoke at the conference, but their support was a show of confidence by the traditionally more conservative crowd. The annual meeting of activists features of who’s who of big-name Republican politicians. It is an important appearance for potential presidential candidates to make.
More moderate Republicans also skipped the conference, but many fared much worse in the straw poll. New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie came in dead last with 1.11% while Florida’s former Gov. Jeb Bush and current Sen. Marco Rubio and came in seventh and eighth at 4.42% and 3.32 %, respectively.
Nobody Cares what any politicians in Washington says. Power in politics, sovereignty in America is with We the People!
MUST WATCH VIDEO
Ted Cruz, an ardent defender of The Bill of Rights and the Second Amendment said during his speech, “In Texas, we define gun control real simple. That’s hittin’ what you aim at.” Cruz Also went on to say, “that following the tragic shooting in Newtown, CT the president didn’t do what she should have done. What he should have done is he should have stood up and said we are going to go after violent criminals and we are going to come down on violent criminals like a ton of bricks. instead he used it as an excuse to come after the rights of law abiding citizens.”
Cruz consistently pointed out that Democrats and establishment gray-beard Republicans both says that things can’t get done. Yet time after time in examples of drone strikes against Americans, Second Amendment gun control, foreign affairs and provisions in the International monetary fund. All won by conservatives.
Too often the establishment GOP says it can’t be done because they are afraid to take a position. In order for there to be change, not only must Democrats go, so must the establishment Republicans who have long forgot what they were sent to Washington, DC to do.
THE CONSERVATIVE BATTLE AGAINST OBAMACARE: HOW DO YOU WIN ELECTIONS … YOU DON’T WIN IT BY STANDING FOR NOTHING …
Cruz went on to blast the establishment same old-same old way of doing things within the GOP of trying to win elections. There is a cluster of political consultants who keep running losing campaigns, making the same mistakes and keep coming back to donors to make the same failed mistakes that did not win the previous times. He stressed that the way you win elections is you stand for principle and you empower the people.
Rasmussen Poll Shows Many Americans Have No Concept of Free Speech … 55% Favor Government Oversight of Political Ads & Candidates’ Comments
ARE YOU INSANE … DID ANYONE TAKING THIS POLL UNDERSTAND WHAT FREEDOM OF SPEECH IS? DO YOU WANT TYRANNY?
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.
An alarming 55% if likely voters in a recent Rasmussen poll stated, “they believe the government should be allowed to review political ads and candidates’ campaign comments for their accuracy.” It gets better, they also wanted to punish those that it decides are making false statements about other candidates. OK FOLKS … HAVE YOU COMPLETELY LOST YOUR MINDS!!! You do realize that “Freedom of Speech” is intended to prevent a tyrannical government from trampling the speech, opinions and comments of ab individuals right? I could care less what party was in power, I would never want a government to control campaign speech. It is up to the voter to inform yourself as to whether some one is fabricating the truth. If that is too difficult, don’t vote.
So 55% of clueless voters would want whatever political party was in power to review and determine whether a political ad was truthful or not? Who could see anything going wrong with that because of course political parties are not partisan of course. The American Spectator has an idea, just create more government bureaucracy and a new agency, call it the Ministry of Political Truth, to oversee this brave new government power. Oh wait, you don’t want the government agency to do it, how about the media?
The U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments this week in a case aimed at overturning an Ohio law that makes it a crime to make false statements in a political campaign. But most voters favor government policing of the truthfulness of campaign ads and statements.
Fifty-five percent (55%) of Likely U.S. Voters believe the government should be allowed to review political ads and candidates’ campaign comments for their accuracy and punish those that it decides are making false statements about other candidates. A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 31% oppose such government oversight. Fourteen percent (14%) are undecided. (To see survey question wording, click here.)
Presently we have a president in Barack Obama who thumbs his nose at the US Constitution, you would actually give him the power to control political speech for campaign speech, REALLY? WAKE UP AMERICA, many brave souls fought and died to bring freedoms and independence to the colonies and form a United States. Act like it!
Victory for Nevada Cattle Rancher Cliven Bundy … BLM Blinks in Confrontation Over the Removal of Rancher’s Cattle From Federal Land, Government Claimed They were Grazing Illegally
The Bureau of land Management is pulling out, victory for Nevada cattle rancher Cliven Bundy.
The Feds and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) have blinked in their Gestapo tactics of governmental overreach in the confrontation with Nevada cattle rancher Clive Bundy. No matter what side of the argument you fall on with regards to this situation, one thing is for certain, this was a complete over-reaction on the part of the Obama administration in creating this type of hostile, overreach and volatile situation. After a week-long standoff between the Feds and the cattle rancher and his supporters, the BLM has done a 180 most likely because there has been too much media reporting of the Fed’s tyrannical nad police state actions. BLM Director Neil Kornze stated, “based on information about conditions on the ground, and in consultation with law enforcement, we have made a decision to conclude the cattle gather because of our serious concern about the safety of employees and members of the public.” More like, the memo came from on high, the Obama presidency cannot withstand a WACO.
However, the Bureau of Land Management vowed Saturday that it would continue its legal fight to remove illegal cattle from a rural Nevada range. This is code for the Fed’s in Washington DC will pull every stunt, behind the scenes, to make this man’s life miserable and put him out of business as he dared make them look bad in public.
ABC News: Nevada Cattle Rancher Wins ‘Range War’ With Feds.
A Nevada cattle rancher appears to have won his week-long battle with the federal government over a controversial cattle roundup that had led to the arrest of several protesters.
Cliven Bundy went head to head with the Bureau of Land Management over the removal of hundreds of his cattle from federal land, where the government said they were grazing illegally.
Bundy claims his herd of roughly 900 cattle have grazed on the land along the riverbed near Bunkerville, 80 miles northeast of Las Vegas, since 1870 and threatened a “range war” against the BLM on the Bundy Ranch website after one of his sons was arrested while protesting the removal of the cattle.
“I have no contract with the United States government,” Bundy said. “I was paying grazing fees for management and that’s what BLM was supposed to be, land managers and they were managing my ranch out of business, so I refused to pay.”
The federal government had countered that Bundy “owes the American people in excess of $1 million ” in unpaid grazing fees and “refuses to abide by the law of land, despite many opportunities over the last 20 years to do so.”
However, today the BLM said it would not enforce a court order to remove the cattle and was pulling out of the area.
“Based on information about conditions on the ground, and in consultation with law enforcement, we have made a decision to conclude the cattle gather because of our serious concern about the safety of employees and members of the public,” BLM Director Neil Kornze said.
“We ask that all parties in the area remain peaceful and law-abiding as the Bureau of Land Management and National Park Service work to end the operation in an orderly manner,” he said.
Take a good look America at to how the Federal government is treating legal Americans. Attack dogs and tasering Americans, UNREAL. Remember when this used to be the United States of America, not a tyrannical police state? The Obama government does not do this to illegal aliens who come into America illegally, but they had no problem treating legal Americans this way.
Ranch Riot!! Bundy Ranch Protesters Tasered by Federal Agents
UPDATE I: BLM return cattle back to Bundy’s. Iin the end, this was all for nothing.
A deal has been reached between Bundy family leaders and the Bureau of Land Management, but not without some very tense moments.
Armed Bundy family leaders met with BLM officers Saturday afternoon in Mesquite to discuss the fate of the Bundy’s cattle that the feds removed from BLM land, over the past week.
Under the deal the cattle were released from a holding area near Mesquite, back onto the federal lands they were removed from.
However, according to the BLM, the deal does not absolve Bundy from any of the fees he owes for having the animals there in the first place.
Rancher Cliven Bundy is not describing it as a deal, but as the American citizens taking back the cattle.
“There is no deal here. The citizens of America and Clark County went and took their cattle. There was no negotiations. They took these cattle. They are in possession of these cattle and I expect them to come home soon,” Bundy said.
FCC Cancels Media Survey Amid Allegations of Trying to Regulate The News and Trample First Amendment Freedom of the Press Rights
Hero of the Week … whistler-blower FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai.
The FCC blinked and has canceled the media survey and plans to evaluate the coverage of media outlets in the Obama’s administration to attempt to violate the First Amendment and Freedom of the Press. As stated at the Washington Examiner, the First Amendment says “Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press …” However, under the Obama administration, the Federal Communications Commission was planning to send government contractors into the nation’s newsrooms to determine whether journalists are producing articles, television reports, Internet content, and commentary that meets the public’s “critical information needs.” As per The Obama Administration, of course. The very agency that controls the licensing for the media was now going to inspect them for content and whether they were telling the correct stories. UNREAL. The now canceled study was known at the FCC as “the CIN Study” was never put to an FCC vote, it was just announced. Imagine that. Why does this reek of IRS-gate? Or AP-gate? But in an act of conscience and bravery, FCC commissioner Ajit Pai came forward and brought the story to the public’s attention in a Wall Street Journal column last week.
First FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai brings the scheme to light and the FCC removed some of the controversial questions
The Federal Communications Commission cancelled a plan to evaluate the coverage of major media outlets Friday after a tidal wave of media criticism alleged the agency was attempting to influence and regulate the news media industry.
“In the course of FCC review and public comment, concerns were raised that some of the questions may not have been appropriate,” the agency said in a statement Friday. “Chairman Wheeler agreed that survey questions in the study directed toward media outlet managers, news directors, and reporters overstepped the bounds of what is required.”
However, despite the fact that the FCC had to pull the plug on this survey because of the negative attention and anti-First Amendment look of this attempt by the government to regulate the media, FCC Chair Wheeler said that it was not an attempt to do so. Sure it wasn’t, so then why cancel the study … hmm? Who backs of an attempt to limit the media unless you were caught red-handed? But instead, they continue to dent what their real intentions were. America needs to wake up … the Obama administration is as lawless as it gets.
Despite a response letter from FCC Chair Tom Wheeler saying the study was not an attempt to force news organizations into changing their coverage, the agency conceded the battle and Wheeler called for the removal of the questions entirely.
“Any suggestion that the FCC intends to regulate the speech of news media or plans to put monitors in America’s newsrooms is false,” the statement said. “The FCC looks forward to fulfilling its obligation to Congress to report on barriers to entry into the communications marketplace, and is currently revising its proposed study to achieve that goal.”
Click here to watch VIDEO – screen grab from Fox News, ‘On the Record’
GRETA VAN SUSTEREN, FOX NEWS HOST: Does President Obama really think no one at FOX will see a government spy in our newsroom? Tonight, an FCC commissioner goes ON THE RECORD and blows the whistle on a plan to install spies in newsroom. They call it something else, like a monitor. But no one is that stupid. We know what they are trying to do.
The FCC commissioner who blew the whistle is here to go ON THE RECORD. Commissioner Ajit Pai joins us.
Nice to see you, sir.
AJIT PAI, FCC COMMISSIONER: Thanks for having me.
VAN SUSTEREN: So your op-ed blew the whistle on this. What is it the FCC wants to do and why you wrote your op-ed?
PAI: The FCC is proposing to do what it is calling a Critical Information Needs, or CIN, study. They will send researchers into newsrooms across the country, television and broadcast and newspapers, to try to figure out why they cover the stories they do. They have identified eight categories of news they think news people should be covering. Some of the questions they ask were highly technical. They are asking reporters, for example, have you ever wanted to cover a story and were told you can’t do so. As I looked into the study design, I got concerned about what it implicated for our First Amendment values. That’s why I wrote it in the “Wall Street Journal.”
VAN SUSTEREN: What’s been the response by the other members of the FCC?
PAI: I haven’t talked to all my colleagues, but I am pleased to report, tonight, the chairman of the FCC, Tom Wheeler, instructed the contractor, who will be doing the study, to remove questions from the study relating to news philosophy and editorial judgment. That’s a positive step but the devil is in the details when it comes to the actual study as implemented
Freedom of the Press? Not in an Obama World … The FCC Wants to Grill Reporters, Editors & News Station Owners About How They Decide Which Stories to Run
WHEN WILL THE TYRANNY STOP WITH THIS OUT OF CONTROL IMPERIALISTIC PRESIDENT?
It would appear that Barack Obama wants to put government FCC monitors in America’s news rooms to determine why media outlets cover certain stories. ARE YOU KIDDING ME!!! So now we are going to have government lackeys in news rooms to monitor and make sure that the media is covering the stories they want them to? Could Barack Obama and the Obama administration possible trample on the United States Constitution and Freedom of Speech any more?
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.
As reported at Mediaite, FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai wrote an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal bringing people’s attention to this study, saying “the government has no place pressuring media organizations into covering certain stories.” And while participation is technically voluntary, ignoring them would not be a wise decision for any news outlet that wants an FCC license. We all know that the MSM is bias and pretty much in lockstep leans to the left, but it is not the governments job to interfere with what they report or how they report . “Participation is voluntary—in theory,” supposedly; however, the FCC’s questions, queries and interrogations may be hard for the broadcasters to ignore as it is this very government agency that could put a media outlet out of business if they spitefully withhold an FCC license. But of course the Obama administration has never gone after or targeted a specific group of people who opposed him, have they … IRS-GATE!
AMERICA, THIS IS WHAT TYRANNY LOOKS LIKE! LET’S JUST COME OUT AND SAY IT … THIS IS ANTI-AMERICAN. WELCOME TO OBAMA’S USS
An Obama administration plan that would get researchers into newsrooms across the country is sparking concern among congressional Republicans and conservative groups.
The purpose of the proposed Federal Communications Commission study is to “identify and understand the critical information needs of the American public, with special emphasis on vulnerable-disadvantaged populations,” according to the agency.
However, one agency commissioner, Ajit Pai, said in a Wall Street Journal op-ed piece Wednesday that the May 2013 proposal would allow researchers to “grill reporters, editors and station owners about how they decide which stories to run.”
He also said he feared the study might stifle the freedom of the press.
Who is Obama kidding?
This is just heinous as Obama uses the death of Daniel Pearl to make it appear that he is for Freedom of the Press
“Reminded us of how valuable a free press is.”
“reminded us that there are those who would go to any leangth in order to silence journalists …”
“A well informed citizenry that is able to make choices and hold governments accountable …”
Obama says, “Clear out the press so that we can take some questions”
Questions that the FCC poses in the study to news managers and staffers, including the following. Honestly, what business is it of the federal government?
- What is the news philosophy of the station?
- How do you define critical information that the community needs?
- Who decides which stories are covered?
- Have you ever suggested coverage of what you consider a story with critical information for your customers (viewers, listeners, readers) that was rejected by management?
New York Governor Andrew Cuomo Says that Conservatives Who are Right to Life & for 1st and 2nd Amendmends ‘Have No Place in the State of New York’
More liberal tolerance … What has taken over the Democrat party … So much of a government in NY state of, by and for the people, all people.
New York Governor Andrew Cuomo said during a WCNY radio interview with Susan Arbetter that that if “extreme conservatives” are “right-to-life, pro-assault-weapon, anti-gay,” then “they have no place in the state of New York, because that’s not who New Yorkers are.” Seriously? Isn’t the governor of a state supposed to represent all the people? Could you imagine if a governor from a “red” state said that no one who was pro-choice, pro-gay or pro-gun control has no place in their state? The MSM would be in a complete and total uproar. Cuomo went on to say that “moderate Republicans have a place in this state” and noted that he can work with moderate Republicans, as they’ve consistently passed his agenda. So only those that agree with Cuomo have a place in New York state. UNREAL! Imagine if Chris Christie made such a comment? Once again we are witness to another double standard. Let’s hope this socialist clown never runs for president.
“Who are they? Are they these extreme conservatives who are right-to-life, pro-assault-weapon, anti-gay? Is that who they are? Because if that’s who they are and if they are the extreme conservatives, they have no place in the state of New York, because that’s not who New Yorkers are.”
This intolerance is coming from a state governor, this is why the framers and Founding Fathers wrote a Bill of Rights to the US Constitution to protect the people from a tyrannical government.
So let’s get this correct, an individual who expresses their First and Second Amendment rights of the US Constitution have no place in New York state? I thought it was the Democrats who claim to have a big tent and are oh so tolerant. The sad reality of Andrew Cuomo’s comments is that he is being seriously and this is what the liberal, socialists who have taken over the Democrat party believe. So for all you folks outside of New York City and who live in upstate New York, you best not be for the rights of new born babies, you best not support the right to bear Arms and you best not be for religious freedom and the right to follow your religious beliefs.