Hamilton, Madison, and Jay

This blog is devoted to a variety of topics including politics, current events, legal issues, and we even take the time to have some occasional fun. After all, blogging is about having a little fun, right?

Location: Mesa, Arizona, United States

Who are we? We're a married couple who has a passion for politics and current events. That's what this site is about. If you read us, you know what we stand for.

Friday, November 21, 2008

"Reasonable regulation" of speech on the Internet? So says Eric Holder

HT to Captain Ed

According to a video uncovered recently, it appears that yet another member (prospective member) of the incoming Obama administration is ignorant when it comes to the law, especially the Constitution. From Newsbusters:

In April 1999, the Columbine High School massacre happened. The shooters, Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris, reportedly learned how to construct sophisticated bombs through their Internet activity. This discovery caused then deputy attorney general Eric Holder to say the following (audio uploaded at Eyeblast.tv:)

The court has really struck down every government effort to try to regulate it. We tried with regard to pornography. It is gonna be a difficult thing, but it seems to me that if we can come up with reasonable restrictions, reasonable regulations in how people interact on the Internet, that is something that the Supreme Court and the courts ought to favorably look at. - May 28, 1999 NPR Morning Edition

As tragic as Columbine was, Holder’s reaction to stifle free speech on the Internet is nonetheless disturbing. Combine his zeal for what he may consider “reasonable regulations” along with his advocacy for a
federal hate crime law (H/T to National Review), and Internet users may find themselves in a world of legal woe after the Obama administration takes over in January.

As Captain Ed points out, Obama can't present a coherent, grounded-in-Constitutional-law argument in favor of gun rights. Joe Biden has no clue what Article I entails. And now Eric Holder apparently misses what the First Amendment says.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

What part of that does he not get? I'm not a lawyer, and I know exactly what that means. He's not talking about making a law like that which forbids people from yelling "Fire" in a theater. He's talking about regulating speech on the Internet to squelch dissent. Remember during the general election when any sort of criticism towards Obama or his ideas as racist.

-- Say that his taxation ideas are insane, you're a racist.
-- Bring up Jeremiah Wright, Michael Pfleger, or Bill Ayers, and you're a racist.
-- Make light of his flowery rhetoric, and how he sounds like he's buying the messianic allusions by his supporters, and you're a racist.
-- Bring up his opposition and hostility towards guns and gun owners, and you're a racist.

We saw this during the election, but apparently shouting us down as racists isn't going to work. Anyone want to bet what will be the first thing that is targeted by Holder and his anti-free speech goons in the Obama Department of Justice? I have a feeling that center-right bloggers are going to among the first to fall under their scrutiny. We can only imagine the sort of harassment that will come from his speech thugs.

Publius II


Blogger David M said...

The Thunder Run has linked to this post in the - Web Reconnaissance for 11/24/2008 A short recon of what’s out there that might draw your attention, updated throughout the day...so check back often.

November 24, 2008 at 9:30 AM  
Blogger knowitall said...

The elitist illuminati will only change what they want to, and nothing that they need to.

December 1, 2008 at 2:08 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home