Archive for the Category » Bill of Rights «

April 14th, 2010 | Author:

Who says bloggers have no influence?  Follow this progression:

  1. Democrats ram Obamacare down our throats
  2. CEO’s of major corporations announce the costs of said Obamacare, as required by law
  3. Lead democrat Waxman has a hissy fit and calls said CEO’s, including Stephenson of AT&T, to appear at a committee hearing
  4. This blogger, akaGaGa, writes a letter of regret on behalf of Stephenson, explaining why he won’t can’t comply attend
  5. Waxman cancels the hearing.

If that’s not cause and effect, I don’t know what is.

Share
April 14th, 2010 | Author:

Well, yes and no, depending on which three judges review your case, according to Wired Threat Level.

Case 1:  A high-school  senior and honor student created a mock MySpace page of his principal, saying he “took drugs and kept beer at his desk.”  The student was suspended for 10 days and subsequently sued the school.

Case 2:  A high-school junior mocked her principal with a fake MySpace profile, insinuating he was “a sex addict and pedophile.”  She, too, was suspended for 10 days and sued.

Both cases wound up in the same circuit court on the same day, but with different 3-judge panels.  One suspension went against the school because “the reach of school authorities is not without limits.”  The other suspension was upheld:  “We decline to say that simply because the disruption to the learning environment originates from a computer located off campus, the school should be left powerless to discipline the student.”

Recognizing that it’s not good policy to issue conflicting rulings, both cases will be re-heard in June:

School officials complained the rulings left them unclear on what legal legs they had to stand on when it comes to punishing students for their online, off-campus speech.

In my humble, non-legal opinion, I offer the solution to both of these cases, and it has nothing to do with the school’s legs, legal or otherwise.  Nor does it have anything to do with First Amendment rights.

  1. Throw out the suspensions, because school’s should not be able to abuse their authority to govern off-campus activities.
  2. The principals – as individuals not school authorities – should file their own lawsuits based on slander, the same way that Hollywood “stars” file slander lawsuits against yellow-rag journalists.  If the student’s want to exercise their “free speech” as adults, they should come under the same laws that other adults do.

This presumes that the statements the students made were, in fact, lies.  If they’re the truth, however, local law enforcement should conduct investigations and file the appropriate charges against the principals.

Share
April 05th, 2010 | Author:

Student who was arrested for doodling on school desk sues city for excessive force

Alexa was perp-walked out of the school in front of her classmates with her hands locked in metal handcuffs behind her back.

Alexa’s mother pleaded with the officers to accompany her daughter to the police precinct, but Camacho was told to go home and wait for a call.

Officers placed Alexa in “an enclosed room” at the precinct and handcuffed her to a pole for more than two hours, the papers note.

Another good reason to homeschool.

Constitution protects all speech, not just nice speech

Veterans groups and others on the political right are outraged at an appellate court decision that ordered the father of a dead Marine to pay the court costs for a group of wackos who protested at the Marine’s funeral.

Get over it. It is the father who dishonored the memory of his dead son by trying to suppress the free speech of others.

It’s a bit like teaching your kids not to hit by beating the crap out of them.

Are They Trying to Scare Us?

Meanwhile, back in the heartland, Dear Leader’s federal swat teams made a three-state sweep of supposed “Christian militia,” complete with helicopters and scary stories about these “Christians” plotting to kill police officers. This from a president who hangs out with Bill Ayers, who really did try to blow up the Pentagon! In the end, they arrested half a dozen of these alleged plotters.

Is this supposed to make us feel afraid? Ooh, look, that’s the kind of people who oppose Dear Leader’s health-care plan—gun-toting homophobic Christian Nazis, racists who don’t believe in evolution, blah-blah-blah. But even scarier is the message that you’d better watch what you say, or those same federal helicopters will be coming after you.

More Chicago-style conditioning of the unwashed public.

Share
March 27th, 2010 | Author:

In this country known for the free speech of its citizens, it appears that freedom doesn’t apply to critics of the current regime.  According to Power Line, companies such as Caterpillar, AT&T, Medtronic, and Verizon have each made announcements about the negative effects that Obamacare will have on their businesses,  from health care benefit cuts to massive layoffs.

This apparently has not set well with our masters in Washington, so they’re flexing their muscles and looking for retribution.  Power Line has posted a copy of a letter sent to Randall Stephenson, the President and CEO of AT&T [page 1 and page 2] requesting his “personal testimony” at a hearing of the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations in April.  And, oh, by the way.  Bring all your top brass, and send us all your internal documents and accounting methods to prove your statements about the cost of Obamacare.  [Apparently, each of these companies received similar letters.]

In case Mr. Stephenson is too busy running his business to respond, I’ll do it for him.

Dear Mr. Waxman and Mr. Stupak,

I have received your letter of March 26, 2010 requesting my testimony at a hearing on April 21, 2010.  Unfortunately, I must decline your kind invitation as I have a prior commitment that day.  I promised my wife I’d wash the car.

Nor will I be able to send the proprietary documents you requested.  My lawyer has advised me they can’t leave the building without a subpoena.

Further, as President and CEO of AT&T, I will continue to make public the effect that government intervention, including Obamacare, has on our business operations.

Take that, you pompous, supercilious thugs.

Sincerely,

Randall Stephenson

President & CEO of AT&T

3.29.10 update:  Letters to Deere, Caterpillar, Verizon, and AT&T have been posted on The Energy & Commerce Subcommittee website.

Share
March 24th, 2010 | Author:

Being the skeptic that I am, I knew the day was coming when Big Brother would co-opt the internet.  It provides way too much freedom and uncensored information for them to allow it to continue as is.  I wasn’t sure how they would try to justify it here in the United States, but I need wonder no longer.   Here’s the story from Wired Threat Level:

The United States is nudging the international community to develop protocols to suspend the internet connections of customers caught downloading copyrighted works, according to a leaked draft of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement.

The United States is leading the 2-year-old, once-secret negotiations over the so-called ACTA accord. The Jan. 18 draft, about 56 pages and labeled “confidential,”  just surfaced, and follows a string of earlier, less comprehensive leaks.

The leak shows that the treaty, if adopted under the U.S. language, would for the first time hold internet service providers responsible when customers download infringing material, unless those ISPs take action by “adopting and reasonably implementing a policy to address the unauthorized storage or transmission of materials protected by copyright or related rights.”

Here’s how this will work.  To catch these nefarious criminals who download copyrighted works, Big Brother is going to turn our internet service providers into spying cops.  In order to stay in business, the ISP’s will have to monitor every download to be able to determine which ones are “legal” and which ones aren’t.  All of this good information will, of course, be available to Big Brother to make sure the ISP’s are being good cops.

The method is similar to the one justified by the “war on terror” whereby border patrol agents can stop and search anyone within 100 miles of the border (which includes almost all of us), because some criminals cross the border.  It’s a handy-dandy method of getting around the Fourth Amendment, which used to protect citizens from unreasonable searches and seizures.

And if you are among those Americans who say, “I have nothing to hide,” then you deserve what you get.

Share