Congressman Tim Huelskamp (R-Kansas) filed amendments to the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) today. One amendment would restrain the Army from conducting its court martial of Master Sgt. Nathan Sommers unless and until the Army first files a report for the Congress to review. Another amendment would unblock the courthouse door so that service members whose First Amendment rights have been violated by the Federal government can seek redress like any other American.
Master Sgt. Nathan Sommers was reprimanded by the military for reading Hannity, Levin and Limbaugh and for an anti-Obama bumper sticker on his car.
Todd Starnes at FOX News reported:
A Midwestern lawmaker is calling on his colleagues in Congress to offer cover to an Army soldier under fire for his conservative political views and religious faith, and accusing the Obama administration of “creating a tyrannical culture of political correctness in the military.”
Rep. Tim Huelskamp, R-Kan., is introducing an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act that would prevent the Army from conducting a court martial of Master Sgt. Nathan Sommers until the military first files a report for Congress to review.
“The Secretary of the Army shall provide to Congress a report on activities with respect to Master Sergeant Nathan Sommers at least 90 days prior to taking any further disciplinary or administrative action against that individual,” states Huelskamp’s amendment.
The amendment would also allow service members to sue in the event their First Amendment rights are violated. Huelskamp said the legislation will “unblock the courthouse door so that service members whose First Amendment rights have been violated by the federal government can seek redress like any other American.”
“Sgt. Sommers is the poster child for an increasingly pervasive pattern of persecution,” Huelskamp told Fox News.
Sommers, a decorated member of the U.S. Army Band, came under intense scrutiny after he was found with pro-Republican, anti-Obama bumper stickers on his personal car. An Army officer informed the solider – in writing – that the stickers were creating “workplace tension.” The 25-year military veteran was also told to stop reading books written by conservative authors while in uniform. A superior officer told him that reading books by Mark Levin, Sean Hannity and David Limbaugh was offensive to other soldiers.
Read the rest here.
Stacy McCain has the scoop on the newest Victicrats, the Internet Trolls as it were. They have jumped aboard the “Feel Sorry for Me Train” and are whining to beat the band. Because, apparently harassing people online is a civil right in their world
“Arrogant sociopathic punks think they can go around threatening people and if you dare say a word back to them, you’re the bad guy.”
– Robert Stacy McCain, Sept. 4, 2012
A basic problem of online life: People Who Don’t Understand How the Internet Works, No Matter How Often You Try to Explain It to Them.
Back in the day you could – and, in many places on the Internet, you still can — say anything you want to say in the comments. People who habitually frequent such places become accustomed to unleashing their idat will, and believe that this a basic First Amendment freedom, which it is — as long as the proprietors of the site don’t care what people say in the comments. But one way or another, that online space is owned by someone, and the proprietor makes the rules.
Try going over to Democrat Underground or Daily Kos, spewing out GOP talking points, and see how long it takes them to ban you.
Trolls don’t understand this. They believe that having access to the Internet confers on them the inalienable right to say anything they want anywhere they want to say it, and any site operator who refuses to acknowledge that right is a fascist totalitarian.
To which I customarily reply: Get your own damned blog.
Lots more to read over at The Other McCain who has been dealing with some of these “oppressed Internet Trolls” and their cyberstalking ways.
Comes from JWF the topic is the Left’s intent to be our National Nanny!
Is it just me or is the left interested in banning pretty much everything these days?
Ah yes, the Left is a movement about control!
A Democratic state legislator in Georgia is pushing to make inappropriate use of Photoshop a crime and he was made the victim of such a prank in retaliation.
State Representative Earnest Smith was one of two co-sponsors of a bill tomake it a crime if someone Photoshops a person into an obscene picture.
He pushed forward with the plan in spite it’s the obvious interference with First Amendment rights, and an internet prankster made him the latest target in response.
One of his constituents took a picture of a nude porn star and put Mr Smith’s head on top.
‘Rep. Smith needs to grow some thick skin if he’s going to be an elected official. Trust me when I say the altered photograph shown above was not the worst I could have done,’ prankster Andre Walker said on his blog where he claimed responsibility for the image.
If Smith, and co-sponsor Pam Dickerson, have their way then such an action would result in a $1,000 fine.
Their proposed law would be broken when any ‘person commits defamation when he or she causes an unknowing person wrongfully to be identified as the person in an obscene depiction’.
The fact is this. In a free society, everyone is going to see, and hear things that offend them. DEAL WITH IT! It is far better for me to be occasionally offended than to live in a nation where Mommy and Daddy Government control everything we say, read and write!
Smith sees this differently
“It’s clear that we need to do something,” he said.
Smith said Monday that he learned last week that someone had digitally pasted his head on the body of a nude man, but he doesn’t know who did it.
“I could not venture to give you an answer,” he said.
The bill received no action last year, but Smith hopes this year will be different, perhaps because the picture targeting him illustrates how vulnerable all politicians are.
“It can be done to anyone at any time,” he said.
So far, he has heard no objections from free-speech advocates defending the Constitution’s First Amendment.
“No one has a right to make fun of anyone. You have a right to speak, but no one has a right to disparage another person. It’s not a First Amendment right,” he said.
Well if no one has that right we better tell every stand up comic to cease and desist I guess. And I do not have a right to slander someone, and there are laws against harassment. But, yes, Mr. Smith I certainly DO have the right to make fun of you. For instance, I am free to call you a bottom-feeding Statist. Or I can call you, sir, an overly sensitive Liberal whiner. See, we are FREE to express opinions. And when we disagree with someone, we are free to criticize them. And why do I imagine that a law, such as you are sponsoring would be used by Liberal politicians and organizations to silence criticism? Maybe because that is what Leftists ass hats like you SIR have engaged in for decades now.
So, these buffoons are going to use the First Amendment to protest against the First Amendment? I wonder if that irony ever dawned on them?
Muslim Americans in Michigan, including a local newspaper editor, will be rallying Friday in Dearborn to protest the YouTube film, “Innocence of Muslims” and advocate for blasphemy laws. Here’s an image of a poster advertising the rally
Nearly a decade after Dearborn’s streets celebrated America for bringing down Saddam Hussein and opening a door to democracy in the Mideast, the same city will be the epicenter today of calls to squelch free speech. Protesting the film, “Innocence of Muslims,” that has sparked protests in the Mideast, rally organizer Tarek Baydoun says that so-called blasphemy laws are necessary to prevent speech that hurts the “the religious feelings of Muslims.”
This assault on the First Amendment in the name of the prophet Mohammed is a sad day in America – and confirms fears that Muslim-American activists do not understand the fundamental separation of church and state in the American Constitution.
“There is a need for deterrent legal measures against those individuals or groups that want to damage relations between people, spread hate and incite violence,” said Arab-American News publisher Osama Siblani, a self-proclaimed “moderate” who is apparently oblivious to how gutting the First Amendment would affect his own business.
Also I must note the multi-ton slab of irony in Osama Siblani’s statement “There is a need for deterrent legal measures against those individuals or groups that want to damage relations between people, spread hate and incite violence,” Hmmmm, I wonder what group of people, maybe a certain religion that might just run afoul of such a law. HMMMMMM
And this story out of Arkansas just reminds us that power hungry Statists will not stop
This story sounds like something you would hear out of China, not the United States. In Gould, Arkansas the city council is planning to pass an ordinance that forbids any group from forming or gathering that will discuss city matters without first getting city council approval – a clear violation of the First Amendment.
They mayor is dead set against it but it appears from the video that they can override him:
Absolute tyranny, every one of these miscreants should be thrown out of office at once! We forget that often times, the most direct threats to our liberty come from city councils and county commissions
And of course, the war on lemonade stands continues