Ezra Levant, on how he was saved by the internet.
Had I been charged with hate speech 10 years ago, I could not have fought back as effectively. If all this had happened in 1996 instead of 2006, few would have known anything about my battle. YouTube, which brought my story alive for 600,000 people by the time the traffic died down, debuted only in 2005. Before that, there was no universally surfed repository of current event–themed videos, and bloggers were much less prevalent. And without the credit card donations made possible by PayPal (which was started in 2000), it’s unlikely that I could have raised the money to cover my legal expenses.
In short, the Internet saved me. In that sense, my story isn’t just about free speech. It’s also about the way new technology has leveled the playing field between big government and private citizens.
Well, it was fun while it lasted.
Under a recently-introduced bill, H.R. 1966, bloggers would face up to two years in prison if they “harass” public figures by criticizing them in a “severe, repeated, and hostile” manner, and thereby cause them “substantial emotional distress.”
[…]
The bill is a telling example of how the American Left has turned against free speech and civil liberties. The bill’s sponsor, Linda Sanchez (D-CA), and nearly all of her 14 co-sponsors are liberals. All of them backed the federal hate-crimes bill passed by the House yesterday, which is designed to allow people who have been found innocent in state court to be reprosecuted in federal court..
Could mean big trouble for Andrew Sullivan…
h/t
Storm:
Instead of moaning about ‘we’, do it for yourself.
There are plenty out there who value individual freedom and are not afraid to speak out about it.
I’m not going to wait for some right-wing collective to define what or how I should say things.
Any time I hear anybody promote statism (the government should do something about this), that’s when I object.
Hundreds of millions of individual acting on a principle of supporting progressiveness as long as progress means more individual freedom will quickly beat the Borg.
Err “ought” not “aught”
As for the qualities in Obama that somehow outweigh the actual governing experience of Palin, I guess that if you don’t believe it, you will not see it.
Andy reminds me of the people in “The Emperor’s New Clothes” patiently explaining to the child that his eyes were deceiving him.
syf wrote: Instead of moaning about ‘we’, do it for yourself
I’m not moaning and I do do for myself. My point was we are stronger together than alone. How long do you think you will ‘do’ for yourself when the brownshirts knock on your door? You may think you’re a tough guy but not tough enough. That’s my point. Alone is not enough.
Right wing collective? You’re kidding right? What right wing collective would that be?
Here’s the link to the proposed bill, entitled “Megan Meier Cyberbullying Prevention Act”
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.1966:
If I understand it correctly, findings do not have legal standing, therefore the intent to address underage “cyberbullying” is not relevant and the act thus applies broadly.
Any comment from the lawyers?
storm:
Keep up the fight. Never let them define you. Stay humble.
When they speak about ‘vision,’ hang on tighter to your wallet.
The brownshirts think they can pick us off one at a time.
They can’t.
“They are playing hard ball and we are playing smurf ball. Until we organize and grow some cojones we will continue to be run over.”
Storm
I’ve commented on this before; I’m of the opinion that as long as women stand idle while liberals wage their “War on Men” there will be no fighting back.
wrt SYF’s comment here are my thoughts. After witnessing what is happening to that hottie down south(miss Cali) and reading the DNS document I’ve decided that I will not speak my mind on many topics anymore. For example, I will not answer any questions regarding gay marriage; and, if I’m pressed hard enough I will say what is PC. I will not be a martyr! As I’ve said before, it will be quite easy for me to assimilate. Yeah I’m white but that will only knock me down a peg or two. My concern for women and gays waivers a little more each day since it is apparent for the most part that the aforementioned don’t value liberty; generally speaking of course.
“All of them backed the federal hate-crimes bill passed by the House yesterday, which is designed to allow people who have been found innocent in state court to be reprosecuted in federal court..”
For those that are not familiar with US Law the above statement violates two restrictions in the constitution. Double jeopardy and Expos Facto. (You may not be tried for the same crime twice; and you may not be charged with a crime that was not a crime when you committed it; e.g. the law was passed after the fact.
Michael, what you say is true… depending on who’s in the SCOTUS. Bary gets to pick one already, and the USA is just one banana peel away from Bary getting to pick -another- one.
That’d give him two sock puppets on the court, which might well be enough to get him a majority ruling on any damn thing he wants.
Constitutionality is decided by men, it does not descend fully formed from Heaven. If the men are corrupt, well, there you go. For a preview of this, the US holds the accused innocent until proven guilty… EXCEPT in tax court. Not going to be too hard to expand that “guilty and you can’t prove you’re innocent to our satisfaction because we can’t be satisfied” to hate speech, fairness doctrine etc. etc. et bloody cetera, given the foot in the door from the McCain/Feingold law and the obscene SCOTUS ruling thereupon.
Trolls who think The Phantom is being needlessly alarmist, see topic at top.
What we are watching is the end of the Republic.
It took Ceaser only bread with the circus to bribe the citizans of their vote & freedom.
I weep for America. A great light in its time.
JMO
Don’t forget, Phantom, tax court is not the ONLY place where innocent until proven guilty is tossed out the window.
The wonderful women’s rights movement, something which every POTUS grovels before, has teemed up with the courts to ensure that men are stripped of many constitutional rights…
Like, being arrested solely upon the words of another, and ejected from your home and denied access to your chilren until you PROVE you are innocent.
The government grants Temporary Restraining Orders against MEN without even so much as a trial, nor the man being able to defend himself before a judge. A woman’s word is good enough. A man can loose his job under such circumstances. (ie. A Policeman will lose his right to carry a firearm when under a TRO and thus, lose his job).
The government has re-enacted debtor’s prisons in the name of “dead beat dads,” of which statistics show that the vast majority are seasonally employed and only 4% earn more than $40,000/yr.
The right to face your accuser has been stripped from men in cases of rape, sexual assault and abuse. In fact, during the trial, it is legal to publish the man’s name, even though he has not been convicted, but the accuser’s name is protected both during and AFTER the trial – even in cases where it is PROVEN to be a false accusation and the false accuser has committed perjury. (There is no attempt to clear the innocent victim’s name, but all things are done to protect the false-accusing, perjuring criminal!)
The least thing they do is certainly not the least, and that is the government KIDNAPPING your children from you, and handing them over to someonw who BROKE A CONTRACT. When a woman files for divorce, she is breaking a contract, and yet the courts reward her for breech of contract with the husband’s money, his house, and by kidnapping his children from him and handing them over to the person who is the aggressor.
I could go on and on.
But anyone who believes that the constitution means jack-shit ought to have a look at the family court system.
Oh, that’s right, you can’t!
All trials are supposed to be public – to keep the judges and courts in line from wielding their powers maliciously – EXCEPT for family courts, where judges are the most totalarian, UN-just sonsabitches in the whole system.
Let it crash.
A society that hates its own citizens so much – especially its men – deserves to die. That’s the same reason Rome died. In the end, no birthrates meant having to rely on immigrants or slaves to defend the empire, of which none of the immigrants or slaves were invested in doing… the same that is happening to the West by marginalizing their men, rather than honouring them.
Let it rot. From it will come new life.
What about Obama’s denigration of Limbaugh, Hannity and Tea Parties. Does his telepromper not count as a blog?
Posted by: ET at May 6, 2009 11:43 AM
Absolutely, ET! In fact, TOTUS has its own blog, here
“Because There Is No POTUS Without TOTUS” – quote.
mhb23re
at gmail d0t calm
Well, let’s not forget that leftards tend to allow their emotions to work heavily on their decisions.
Every dog has their day.