Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
June 2, 2010
Outrage is rising over a Michigan lawmaker’s plan to introduce a bill to license bloggers and internet-based journalists.
“State Sen. Bruce Patterson is introducing legislation that will regulate reporters much as the state regulates hairdressers, auto mechanics and plumbers. Patterson, who also practices constitutional law, says the general public is being overwhelmed by an increasing number of media outlets — traditional, online and citizen generated — and an even greater amount of misinformation,” Fox News reported on May 28. “Legitimate media sources are critically important to our government,” he said.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is just insane! Everybody that blogs, reads blogs or likes to surf the net should be outraged. What has changed? Not long ago any talk like this would be met with so much resistance and ridicule, the guy would be lucky not to be run out of town. I mean, I still have that in me, it makes me fighting mad. I wouldn't be for it even if the other side stated a good argument, but they don't even have that. Are you being overwhelmed by an increasing number of media outlets? Or do you think you should be able to decide for yourself who to listen to? We are big boys and girls, we know that there are blogs that are full of it. We also know that most blogs don't have people paying them to lie, omit or spin a story.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Obama’s man at the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Cass Sunstein, is on record as advocating holding blogs and alternative internet news media “responsible” for the information they publish. Sunstein penned a book entitled “On Rumors: How Falsehoods Spread, Why We Believe Them, What Can Be Done.” Sunstein’s book is essentially a blueprint for imposing online censorship.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now we have Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagen against free speech and the second amendment. BTW, did you see what happened in Chicago? An 80+ year old man shot and killed an intruder that broke into his home. Had the old man followed the gun ban law in Chicago, he and his wife would probably be dead right now. People shouldn't have to make a choice between following the law and defending themselves.
Sunstein & his fellow Khazakhs should know all about the spreading of falsehoods; they've been milking and bilking the world on the "poor, oppressed victims of society" one for decades now.
ReplyDeleteI tell you this: ANY goddamned Schtaat stormtrooper sets foot in my home to enforce an unconstitutional law is not going to have the guts to make such a mistake again.
To answer the question: There's NOTHING wrong with free speech, but politricksters who appear all-family-values on TV for the cameras, then play stink-fingers with other guys behind the scene while going to extremes to cover it up are deathly afraid those hidden realities of their *ahem* "orientation" will float to the top.
ReplyDeleteI have a lot more respect for the GLBT community reps that signed on to counterprotest with Michael Moore than the closet variety, who are still trying to pretend to be something they are not.
The Khazakh Obammunists in the cabinet seem to have much more to fear in these regards.
It's pure grace of God we're not a third-world dictatorship by now!
G in Da B - I hear you, same here.
ReplyDeleteYDG - Good! Some of the people that the guy WE voted for picked out, are very scary.
Ted - Yeah, we agree.
Ted - Yeah, not much of a choice at all. Singing "Bomb Iran".
ReplyDeleteRon Paul would have won I'm sure, but they didn't want someone that they couldn't control.