adios 1st ammendment
 

further attempts to erode our right to free speech.

http://infowars.net/articles/january...ers_Prison.htm

Absolutely......
 

Disgraceful! I didn't even know about the Mcain legislation, I think both idea's would spit in the face of our founding fathers! I hope and pray neither will ever come up for a vote, or see the light of day! Thanks for bringing these to our attention.

could be they got the idea from china...

http://www.betanews.com/article/Chin...ers/1161624494

terrifying.

Pais,
Thank you for posting an informative article that presents very real concern.
It never fails to amaze me that those who advocate so strongly in their pursuit of bringing all the "freedoms" of a democractic republic that we model to the world, at the very dear expense of so many lives and injured, demonstrate their own hypocricy by supporting such legislation.
Our "first amendment freedoms" are being trampled.
Will they be silenced?
I don't believe so. Our voices will continue to be heard despite any and all efforts to silence them.
To paraphrase Martin Luther King, those that remain passive when liberty is denied, do so as an act of betrayal in their alliance with those that assault those freedoms.
DTS

LOL! Nice one!

DTS, I agree completely (of course you know that...not fair quoting Dr King). There is a quote from a TV show (Law and Order) that unfortunately also applies here:
"In the end, we have only those rights that we can defend...only those rights"
Again, I see little difference between Republicans and most Dems here...that is the worry! Gonna be tough for them to silence the net though....a movie quote (Serenity), "You can't stop the signal!" Lets hope so!

Somerfrost,
Again, I agree, and thank you for your unfailing spirit.
The very rights that some are seeking to silence have already been paid for, with very real blood.
Those that forget do not appreciate nor respect that which has been given.
Treason is something that many would be wise to see and act against.

i think the right to free speech is the first amendment for a reason. it's at the top because it is the most important. any attempts to take that right away, or chip away at it, is outrageous.

What is sad is that the internet is a wonderful tool. There is so much good that can come from the internet. But at the same time, the same amount of bad can come from the internet as well. Finding a way to keep certain things off the internet is important as well. This is an interesting debate. I find myself on the fence on many issues where the internet is concerned.

Hey, guys, I clicked on that link to try to find the text of the amendment, and here's the thing-- I can't find it, but it says that the amendment struck down related to "paid efforts" at grassroots lobbying. So now I'm wondering exactly what the amendment said, and if it really would require all bloggers to register, or only those political ones that take donations. As much as I'm spitting mad at the Dems right now, I have to say, the ones who voted to keep the amendment don't seem like the ones I'd expect to vote for it, so now I'm very curious. Can anyone find the text to the amendment so I can see exactly what it was they were voting on?

Not to say the media can give the wrong impression, but they can.

Okay, I found the amendment (220 of S1, if anyone's interested):

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/...6qb7Pc:e38473:

Here's the thing, as best I can tell-- the amendment was requiring people who are PAID to lobby via internet and grassroots to register, and even if paid, if they reach an audience of fewer than 500, they don't register. If more than 500, they register if they are paid to lobby. Here's the intro:

(1) in paragraph (7), by adding at the end of the following: `Lobbying activities include paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying, but do not include grassroots lobbying.'; and

(2) by adding at the end of the following:

`(17) GRASSROOTS LOBBYING- The term `grassroots lobbying' means the voluntary efforts of members of the general public to communicate their own views on an issue to Federal officials or to encourage other members of the general public to do the same.


It goes on, but as best I can understand, it doesn't apply to the average blogger one whit; just to those paid to lobby people to act, at the grassroots level or otherwise.

Either way, it's been defeated. But since it involves money, now I see why all the Republicans voted against it. ;)

Though while we're on the subject of eroding rights:

http://www.consortiumnews.com/2007/011807.html

I thought no one could be worse than Ashcroft. Until Gonzales.

Now that is truly frightening! Faulty logic of course as well...why declare that some right can't be taken away unless it exists in the first place??? These folks are starting to annoy me!!!!

Being from Pa, I know Specter pretty well...he must have fought himself extremely hard to avoid ripping into this clown!

The more I think about it, the madder I get...how dare these clowns look upon the Constitution as their toy?? Playing word games with people's rights...the article is right, apply this idiotic "logic" and you can disregard most of it...including several articles. That a high-ranking official would say such a thing in public shows two things...stupidity and arrogance...a lethal pairing!

I don't know, Somer-- Specter always seems on the verge of turning into a genuinely independent thinker and then he backs down, you know? (I'm a PA native, as I think you know). The man continually sets me up and then breaks my heart. Kind of like some of my ex-boyfriends. Okay, just one. But he was a doozy!

Or maybe I'm still remembering the audience laughing when Specter's name was brought up by Costner's character in "JFK." He was the author of the magic bullet theory, right?