Next week we will celebrate the birth of an idea that has sustained us for 231 years:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
Our ancestors treated these precious rights as of the most profound importance, worth risking all for:
We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.
Can anyone imagine any of the moral and intellectual pygmies in our government pledging "our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor" for anything?
Our cultural elites are only too ready to sell out our most precious rights in order to press their own agenda. Free speech, that is, the freedom to offend any and all, is under attack from the most primitive and vicious of troglodytes. Sadly they are all too often joined by the cowardly and frightened among the intelligentsia.
Senator Feinstein was on Fox News Sunday with Chris Wallace and her understanding of our constitutional rights are so susceptible to her fear of people hearing objectionable ideas that she is considering looking into corrective measures:
WALLACE: Let me bring in Senator Feinstein.
Oklahoma Senator Inhofe says that he overheard Barbara Boxer and Hillary Clinton three years ago complaining about talk radio and saying that there should be a legislative fix. Both of them deny it ever happened.
But let me ask you about yourself. Do you have a problem with talk radio, and would you consider reviving the fairness doctrine, which would require broadcasters to put on opposing points of view?
FEINSTEIN: Well, in my view, talk radio tends to be one-sided. It also tends to be dwelling in hyperbole. It's explosive. It pushes people to, I think, extreme views without a lot of information.
This is a very complicated [Immigration] bill. It's seven titles. Most people don't know what's in this bill. Therefore, to just have one or two things dramatized and taken out of context, such as the word amnesty — we have a silent amnesty right now, but nobody goes into that. Nobody goes into the flaws of our broken system.
This bill fixes those flaws. Do I think there should be an opportunity on talk radio to present that point of view? Yes, I do, particularly about the critical issues of the day.
WALLACE: So would you revive the fairness doctrine?
FEINSTEIN: Well, I'm looking at it, as a matter of fact, Chris, because I think there ought to be an opportunity to present the other side. And unfortunately, talk radio is overwhelmingly one way.
WALLACE: But the argument would be it's the marketplace, and if liberals want to put on their own talk radio, they can put it on. At this point, they don't seem to be able to find much of a market.
FEINSTEIN: Well, apparently, there have been problems. It is growing. But I do believe in fairness. I remember when there was a fairness doctrine, and I think there was much more serious correct reporting to people. [Emphasis mine-SW]
It is chilling to see that one of our great liberal solons fundamentally agrees with the most intolerant and totalitarian fascists; some speech is not "correct" enough and needs to be restricted.
The powerful have never enjoyed criticism; in reality, few of us do enjoy criticism. Generally our tolerance for criticism is inversely related to the accuracy of the criticism. When those we elect to serve us begin to confuse their own desire to escape criticism with what is best for their constituents, the erosion of our rights escalates. McCain-Feingold was a well intentioned and poorly conceived abomination that has failed in almost every conceivable way (and the Supreme Court today has begun redress); the Fairness Doctrine was a poorly intentioned and well conceived abomination which should remain interred.
It appears that the next election will be all about various "issues" that will serve primarily to obfuscate serious threats to our fundamental rights...interesting times impend.
Recent Comments