Discussion about this post

User's avatar
bill's avatar

dr rowen, one of your best articles. clear and concise and fact filled. excellent. yes, it is not called the "first" amendment for nothing. if that amendment is somehow bypassed and digital currency forced upon us, it's game over and rome will have fallen again.

actually, that analogy is not correct. rome had nothing like our "of, for, and by the people", but it was the most powerful empire ever, and tho not technically an empire, watching the u.s. being destroyed during my lifetime does remind me of rome burning. bill diehl

Expand full comment
Marcion's avatar

other quotes:

Walz::

“I think we need to push back on this. There’s no guarantee to free speech on misinformation or hate speech, and especially around our democracy.”

Kamala:

"And the bottom line is that you can’t say you have one rule for Facebook and you have a different rule for Twitter. The same rule has to apply, which is that there has to be a responsibility that is placed on these social media sites to understand their power. They are directly speaking to millions and millions of people without any level of oversight or regulation. And that has to stop."

...and NO fact checkers commented when Walz said that the "Supreme Court Test" for free speech was yelling fire in a crowded theater. That is absolutely NOT, and had never been, a Supreme Court test for free speech. That was dicta (a non-binding side comment) by Oliver Wendell Holmes in a 1919 case about the Espionage Act, which was overturned anyway in the 60's. It's EXTREMELY disturbing that a governor would not know about the First Amendment.

More concerning... my comment is not simply a fact check, it's a glimpse into the entire paradigm, philosophy of Walz and Kamala. Think for a moment about WHY they believe in the "greater good", making decisions "for your own good", etc. This is extreme paternalism, some of the favorite phrases used by fascists throughout history. In other words, they are justified (indeed, morally obligated) to censor or outlaw anything they think might be bad for the "masses" (they don't care about YOU, how the individual may get trampled in this process. It's a Machiavellian math question, not a question of individual freedoms or liberties, etc). Censor social media & beyond, deny medical autonomy, take away gas cars, issue a national property tax, etc. And of course this can change from moment to moment - like California mandating formaldehyde in mattresses, then later banning formaldehyde in mattresses. But facts are not important either - the only thing that's important is that ever-present paternalistic hand guiding us through our lives because we're incapable of making our own decisions about our autonomy.

And by the way, I do define myself as a classic liberal. But as RFK has said many times, the Democratic party is NOT the party it used to be. And if JFK were alive today he would be booted out of the Democratic party with prejudice, and labeled a right-wing nut job by the media.

Expand full comment
6 more comments...

No posts