BZ’s very own federal government: coming for MY First Amendment rights

First Amendment WrappedFirst, from the WashingtonExaminer.com:

Dems on FEC move to regulate Internet campaigns, blogs, Drudge

by Paul Bedard

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.

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’s rules. “A reexamination of the commission’s approach to the internet and other emerging technologies is long over due,” she said.

Does anyone with a semblance of common sense realize, for example, what the Drudge Report actually is?  For the most part Matt Drudge doesn’t write his stories; his site is merely an aggregator of stories from around the globe and around the internet.

He takes them and collates them, then places them on his site with accompanying headlines.  It is the headlines and the types of stories featured on Drudge to which Leftists object.  They also object to Drudge’s massive popularity and his incalculable hit ratio.

When Drudge makes a link to a story, that site’s servers can frequently be downed due to the quantity of hits.  To object to Drudge, however, is to object to reality.

“I told you this was coming.”

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 Washington Examiner, are regulated just like normal TV ads.

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 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 “Obama Girl,” and “Jib Jab” would also face regulations.

“I told you this was coming,” he told Secrets. Earlier this year he warned that Democrats on the panel were gunning for conservative Internet sites like the Drudge Report.

An incredibly important final paragraph:

“Regrettably, the 3-to-3 vote in this matter suggests a desire to retreat from these important protections for online political speech — a shift in course that could threaten the continued development of the Internet’s virtual free marketplace of political ideas and democratic debate,” they concluded.

Ladies and gentlemen, when did you ever possibly believe that your First Amendment rights could even remotely be threatened by some capricious force that is not guaranteed by your federal government in its Bill of Rights or US Constitution?

Is that not insane?  Your federal government threatening its own guarantees?

BZ

US Flag Under Attack

Why Demorats do not want voter ID, and why they want illegals to vote:

From the WashingtonPost.com:

Could non-citizens decide the November election?

by Jesse Richman and David Earnest

Could control of the Senate in 2014 be decided by illegal votes cast by non-citizens? Some argue that incidents of voting by non-citizens are so rare as to be inconsequential, with efforts to block fraud a screen for an agenda to prevent poor and minority voters from exercising the franchise, while others define such incidents as a threat to democracy itself. Both sides depend more heavily on anecdotes than data.

In a forthcoming article in the journal Electoral Studies, we bring real data from big social science survey datasets to bear on the question of whether, to what extent, and for whom non-citizens vote in U.S. elections. Most non-citizens do not register, let alone vote. But enough do that their participation can change the outcome of close races.

That is precisely what the Demorats want.

Our data comes from the Cooperative Congressional Election Study (CCES). Its large number of observations (32,800 in 2008 and 55,400 in 2010) provide sufficient samples of the non-immigrant sub-population, with 339 non-citizen respondents in 2008 and 489 in 2010. For the 2008 CCES, we also attempted to match respondents to voter files so that we could verify whether they actually voted.

But here’s the Crux of the Biscuit:

Because non-citizens tended to favor Democrats (Obama won more than 80 percent of the votes of non-citizens in the 2008 CCES sample), we find that this participation was large enough to plausibly account for Democratic victories in a few close elections. Non-citizen votes could have given Senate Democrats the pivotal 60th vote needed to overcome filibusters in order to pass health-care reform and other Obama administration priorities in the 111th Congress.

And there you go.  “Non-citizens tended to favor Democrats.”  That is precisely the reason for the Demorat pushback on voter ID laws, and the insistence on not closing our southern border.  It is no more complicated or craven than that.  Demorats seeking perpetual and unchallenged power.

BZ

 

AZ Sheriff: Obama Administration Refusing to Give Law Enforcement Names of Criminal Illegals

From Breitbart.com:

Thursday on Fox News Channel’s “Your World With Neil Cavuto,” Pinal Co., AZ Sheriff Paul Babeu said the Obama administration not only “knowingly lied” about releasing criminal illegal immigrants last year but also they will not release the names of those criminals to law enforcement so they can protect the citizens.

Babeu said he sent a letter to DHS Assistant Secretary John Morton over a year ago to get the names of the criminals released in his county and to this point he has received no reply.

Babeu said, “I need to protect the citizens of my county and God knows where these individuals are. And they have a greater propensity for recidivism, the return to crime, because they’re not even from our country. And they have committed some of the most egregious crimes of murder and armed robbery and assault against a cop.”

Let’s not forget they are eligible for as much if not more Free Cheese than the average American as well. All in exchange for Demorat votes — so the Demorats may remain in power ad infinitum.

BZ

 

Canada’s PM Stephen Harper can actually identify a terrorist

As opposed to Barack Hussein Obola.

“We will learn more about the terrorist.”

Harper can actually identify a terrorist.  And knows how to utilize the word with regard to his country.  He can also identify savagery.  And quantify it as such.

Mr Obola and his minions cannot even identify Nidal Hassan and Alton Nolen as responsible for anything more than instances of so-called “workplace violence.”

If as a nation its leaders cannot even name evil, and cannot call it out.  .  .

Then it is potentially doomed.

No more, no less.

BZ

Obama Must Not Be NamedAs in: he who must not be associated with Demorats because they wish to actually attempt to keep their seats this time around.