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.
–First Amendment to the US Constitution
Constitution Day honors September 17, 1787, when the framers signed the US Constitution and sent it to the states for ratification. As we celebrate that event’s 237th anniversary this week, our Constitutional liberties are under attack like I’ve never seen before in my lifetime.
Many of us started noticing something was badly awry back during Covid and the 2020 elections and aftermath. People were losing accounts, losing followers, being placed in social media “timeout,” etc. The worst offenders seemed to be Facebook, Twitter 1.0 (under Dorsey), Amazon, Google and YouTube.
It was hard to put a finger on what was going on or why, but after Elon Musk did humanity a huge service by buying Twitter and uncovering its secrets, we saw in “The Twitter Files” many US government agencies were targeting particular accounts and messages for throttling or outright censorship.
The loophole they used seemed to be, “the government isn’t directly censoring, but they told private businesses to censor who would then do the dirty work themselves.”
Kamala Harris, the presidential nominee who never won a single primary but was hand-picked after party bosses threw Joe Biden under the bus, was defending Twitter silencing then-President Trump.
Harris: “And the bottom line is that you can’t say that 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, uh, er, uh, 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, of, of oversight or regulation. And that has to stop.”
So the million dollar question is, who will provide the “oversight” and “regulation”?
The idea is clearly the government.
Harris’ vice presidential running mate, Tim Walz of Minnesota, outrageously claimed: “There’s no guarantee to free speech on ‘misinformation’ or ‘hate speech,’ and especially around our democracy.”
Here again, who decides what “misinformation” or “hate speech” are? As for making threats, that’s already illegal. As some have pointed out, “Hate speech” is what the politicians hate to hear. And notice the “around our democracy” talk. Ponder these kinds of statements:
- “Biden is cognitively disabled.”
- “It was hypocritical for Tim Kaine to try to remove Confederate names from US military bases while he and his family were living on Confederate Avenue in Richmond.”
- “I’m concerned about the security and integrity of our elections and voting procedures.”
By that kind of twisted thinking, all the above could be squelched, under the guise that “You’re attacking our democracy!”
If you accept the premise “you can’t criticize our democracy [aka government], then it’s only a mental baby step to “You can’t criticize any politicians.” And that is dictatorship.
Just last Sunday President Trump miraculously survived a second attempt on his life since July 13. Despite calls to “tone down the rhetoric,” Hillary Clinton ramps up the hysteria with open calls for censorship. Clinton on MSNBC: “There are Americans who are engaged in this kind of propaganda. And whether they should be civilly or even in some cases criminally charged is something that would be a better deterrent.”
Just like “hate speech” or “misinformation,” who will determine what “propaganda” is? The Executive Branch? Judges? MSNBC? CNN? Fox? Hillary Clinton? Kamala Harris? Dick Cheney?
And did you catch Hillary’s main threat? Those who post anything that contradicts the “official narrative” can be arrested and jailed, and the “deterrent” is intimidating people from speaking their mind in the first place!
This is the talk of a wannabe tyrant, and remember, Tim Kaine was her 2016 running mate!
And speaking of “news” channels…. The First Amendment guarantees a free press. So, in a sane world with honest journalists, wouldn’t reporters and editors be the most vociferous and vehement supporters of the Constitution and attack all attempts at censorship?
As it is, “journalists” (aka presstitutes) for censorship makes as much sense as chickens for KFC!
This is 2024, and as I see it, anyone who still trusts the government and/or state-run media to tell you what the truth is and to disregard everything they call “misinformation” is either not paying attention, not very honest…or not very bright.
People have written whole columns explaining how much of what was debunked as “misinformation” in the past eight to ten years turned out to be true. Just one example is the promise that “the Covid vaccine is safe and effective. If you take it and stay boosted, not only will you never get Covid, you’ll never pass it on either.”
To those who say, “Censorship could never happen here,” I say “Don’t fool yourself.”
For one, it has already happened and is happening now. Plus, there are many formerly free nations that are now clamping down on free speech: the UK, Ireland, Canada, and Brazil, just to name a few.
Frankly, these attacks against free speech are similar to what Communist China has been doing to its citizens in what they call “Social Credit.”
Twitter user Songpinganq explains: “In China, a single social media post that deemed misinformation by government can cost you 50 social credit points, leading to arrest and blacklisting. This can affect your career, your ability to take a train, your internet speed, and even your children’s access to education.”
Defend the Constitution so one day it can still defend you!
– Scott Dreyer