Next year, the Supreme Court can throw open the doors for voters to learn the truth about those seeking power in America. Or not. In an unusual move, the Court declined to decide a case on Americans' right to speak out on candidates during presidential elections that was argued this year. Instead, they will rehear it this fall, focusing on a new legal issue in a case that will pit two legal heavyweights against each other.
Cultural relativists like to talk about dialogue. They tell us that we need to engage in dialogue with people who are different from ourselves so that we can understand their perspective and become more tolerant. They tell us that we must listen to the voices of the marginalized and the excluded so that we can rethink our assumptions about the world.
While most Americans readily embrace the opportunity to honor our nation's fallen, increasingly some have become critical if not hostile to this effort, particularly when religion or expressions of faith are involved.
When President Obama announced his new budget a few weeks ago involving record spending, tax increases, deficits and debt, he did so with soaring rhetoric about spending cuts (non-existent), tax cuts for 95% of workers (misleading), and cutting the deficit in half in 5 years (good luck). This misdirection rhetoric is now a common Obama pattern.
People who don't know much about freedom of the press (or don't care much about it) often say that the government has a right to regulate the content of broadcast media because "the public owns the airways." If that were true, the government would have a right to censor your personal phone calls and e-mails.
While President Obama's Federal Communications Commission (FCC) prepares to attack conservative talk radio with some version of the Fairness Doctrine, Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia in open court last week may have thrown a bombshell into those plans.
On Mar. 24, the Supreme Court heard arguments in Citizens United v. FEC, the latest installment in an ongoing series of challenges to the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (BCRA), better known as McCain-Feingold. This case has far-reaching implications for the future of campaign activities, and draws an important line between the right of citizens to speak out and the power of government to imprison them if they do.
“Sexting” is a national activity of young girls taking nude or seminude photographs of themselves, and sending them out using cell phones. The photos get widely distributed, leading to harm to the girls, and in one case, to a suicide. The ACLU has sued a local prosecutor, seeking a court ruling that “sexting” is free speech, and the prosecutor should cease acting against it.
The facts for this article, but not its legal conclusions, come from an article on the MTV website on 27 March 2009. The article begins by discussing the phenomenon of “sexting,” teenaged girls sending nude or seminude photographs of themselves to others […]
This op-ed originally appeared on American Thinker on March 27, 2009.
While campaigning for the U.S. Senate and then the presidency, Barack Obama said he believed in the individual right to bear arms. Those aware of his record and rhetoric reckoned he was referring to his wife’s penchant for sleeveless attire, not the Second Amendment.
During his 2004 run for the Senate, Obama said
“I think that the Second Amendment means something. I think that if the government were to confiscate everybody’s guns unilaterally that I think that would be subject to constitutional challenge.”
No kidding.
He didn’t say […]
Congressman Mike Pence (R-IN) became an inaugural signer of the American Civil Rights Union's "Freedom to Listen" pledge on Monday, vowing to protect the First Amendment by standing against "any and all efforts to censor or in any way restrict the people's freedom to listen to the unfettered airing of political views of their choice on broadcast media or the Internet." The pledge is designed to unify support against efforts to restrict Americans' constitutional freedom to listen.
