Biggest idiot on the planet. Congressman Hank Johnson D-GA

[Meister37]

This dude needs retired. Forever. Same guy who thought Guam would tip over if we put all our troops and equipment on one side of the island.

http://atlanta.cbslocal.com/2012/11/...rol-of-speech/

Now he feels we need to limit free speech.

[bsgesch]

Biggest idiot on the planet.

Strong words.

Clearly you haven't met my sister...

[steevo025]

That's almost as bad as "legitimate rape" but not quite. Every side has their extremists.


Sent from my iPhone using Motorcycle.com App

[ALTON05R1]

why does he have to be from my state.

Sent from my SPH-D710 using Motorcycle.com Free App

[WarMachine]

Originally Posted by Meister37

This dude needs retired. Forever. Same guy who thought Guam would tip over if we put all our troops and equipment on one side of the island.

http://atlanta.cbslocal.com/2012/11/...rol-of-speech/

Now he feels we need to limit free speech.

I get what he is trying to do, but he's still dumb as a box of rocks. The people that voted him in are even dumber.

[Gearheaded]

He's trying to say we shouldn't treat corporations as people, I can understand that. But he definitely is going about it all wrong.

[drjak]

“They control the media. They control the messages that you get,” he added. “And these folks … are setting up a scenario where they’re privatizing every aspect of our lives as we know it. So, wake up! Wake up! Let’s look at what’s happening.”

I don't know about an amendment but the quote above is dead on.

[Meister37]

Originally Posted by drjak

“They control the media. They control the messages that you get,” he added. “And these folks … are setting up a scenario where they’re privatizing every aspect of our lives as we know it. So, wake up! Wake up! Let’s look at what’s happening.”

I don't know about an amendment but the quote above is dead on.

Ending corporate personhood is the answer there. When was the last time you saw a corporation in jail or Vote? They have to be held to both standards in order to be afforded the same protections.

[Fuzzy]

Originally Posted by WarMachine

I get what he is trying to do, but he's still dumb as a box of rocks. The people that voted him in are even dumber.

I'm pretty sure he accurately represents his constituents,mentally and ideologically.

[z064life]

Originally Posted by drjak

“They control the media. They control the messages that you get,” he added. “And these folks … are setting up a scenario where they’re privatizing every aspect of our lives as we know it. So, wake up! Wake up! Let’s look at what’s happening.”

I don't know about an amendment but the quote above is dead on.

how is privatizing our lives a bad thing...it's about time the govt gets the fk out of the way.

And just curious...does that mean they are going to control the "free speech" of unions as well? They are no less a corporation

[lobsterhound]

Originally Posted by z064life

how is privatizing our lives a bad thing...it's about time the govt gets the fk out of the way.

And just curious...does that mean they are going to control the "free speech" of unions as well? They are no less a corporation

I could even find a little bit of Marxist/Socialist in me for that cause

[Meister37]

80% of federal programs and alphabet soup are illegal according to the constitution.

[Saphexus]

Originally Posted by Meister37

80% of federal programs and alphabet soup are illegal according to the constitution.

Um... no.

If the article is telling the truth, this man believes that corporations and unions strong enough to help support a campaign are somehow feeding us everything we see in the media.

Now while that's no govt conspiracy (and completely possible and probably even truthful) is it really gonna change anything? No.

And doesn't the FCC limit what can be aired over television?

[z064life]

Originally Posted by Saphexus

Um... no.

If the article is telling the truth, this man believes that corporations and unions strong enough to help support a campaign are somehow feeding us everything we see in the media.

Now while that's no govt conspiracy (and completely possible and probably even truthful) is it really gonna change anything? No.

And doesn't the FCC limit what can be aired over television?

Guarantee the asshole isn't including unions

[Meister37]

Originally Posted by Saphexus

Um... no.

If the article is telling the truth, this man believes that corporations and unions strong enough to help support a campaign are somehow feeding us everything we see in the media.

Now while that's no govt conspiracy (and completely possible and probably even truthful) is it really gonna change anything? No.

And doesn't the FCC limit what can be aired over television?

Um no..... Hard to argue against that. Your debate fail is strong.

Please, explain why I'm wrong.

[Saphexus]

Originally Posted by z064life

Guarantee the asshole isn't including unions

Maybe not, there you, but any proposed "solution" would include unions, since they mention:

Corporations and unions are protected under the First Amendment of the Constitution because of the ruling in “Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission,” which found that a state law prohibiting corporations from making political campaign contributions using their treasury funds was unconstitutional.

That Democratic Representative is saying that a fix to the problem is necessary, and you cannot honestly think that if they included corporations, they wouldn't address unions.

Originally Posted by Meister37

Um no..... Hard to argue against that. Your debate fail is strong.

Please, explain why I'm wrong.

You said that 80% of federal programs and alphabet soup are illegal according to the constitution. Nothing in the constitution states that the govt cannot create programs to regulate media. While we can see obvious accounts of our govt going against the spirit of the constitution and the freedom our founding fathers desired for us as they created it, the constitution is taken in a very literal sense.

It's picked apart word for word, and any number of loopholes can be found and utilized to do whatever the govt wants. They are only limited in what the document literally says very clearly can and cannot happen.

[KMac]

If it was so clear, how come the Supreme Court is always so busy?

[lobsterhound]

Originally Posted by Saphexus

That Democratic Representative is saying that a fix to the problem is necessary, and you cannot honestly think that if they included corporations, they wouldn't address unions.
.

I have no doubt whatsoever that the democrats would try and exclude unions from anything of the sort. They don't even try to play by the rules

[z064life]

Originally Posted by Saphexus

Nothing in the constitution states that the govt cannot create programs to regulate media.

and that's where you are WRONG. The constitution was written, along with supporting documents...to be what the federal govt CAN do....it was never intended to list everything it can NOT do

The state governments on the other hand are very unrestricted for the most part

[Meister37]

Originally Posted by Saphexus

Maybe not, there you, but any proposed "solution" would include unions, since they mention:

That Democratic Representative is saying that a fix to the problem is necessary, and you cannot honestly think that if they included corporations, they wouldn't address unions.



You said that 80% of federal programs and alphabet soup are illegal according to the constitution. Nothing in the constitution states that the govt cannot create programs to regulate media. While we can see obvious accounts of our govt going against the spirit of the constitution and the freedom our founding fathers desired for us as they created it, the constitution is taken in a very literal sense.

It's picked apart word for word, and any number of loopholes can be found and utilized to do whatever the govt wants. They are only limited in what the document literally says very clearly can and cannot happen.

Shall not be infringed is pretty clear, yet the ATF regulates firearms that are created in a state and never leave that state. The media is interstate commerce so it is legal to regulate at the federal level if it's transmitted across state lines. The FDA regulates milk and cheese that never crosses a state line, illegal and against the constitution. Do you see what I'm getting at? IT needs to end. The federal government is far too large and encompassing to be allowed to grow more. Our future as a country is on the line. If it continues this way we will cease to exist as a republic. This asshat from georgia is a prime example of why we're fooked.

All these agencies continue to regulate things they have no constitutional authority to. Your attitude of ambivalence towards it is the reason they continue to usurp our rights and freedoms. It's time to pick a side and stick with it. You're either a lemming or a patriot. Choose.

If you choose to continue to live in the tyrannical state of California (the documented worst run state in the union) you are supporting the socialist elite.