Sunday, November 22, 2015

Obama's First Amendment Doctrine

Over the years, we can get the jest of where Obama stands on free speech. Firstly, he is a proponent of free speech so long as others agree with him. Secondly, he is a proponent for lying and manipulating speech in an effort to make his administration look good. And finally, he condones the use of violence to protect his point of view.

John Kerry recently said the Charlie Hebdo terror attack was “rational”. Okay, so it is rational or justifiable for someone to kill twelve people over a picture or cartoon? And Obama’s non-reaction to the attack tells all. The US was the only major country not to condemn the attack and send representation to the funerals. Obama’s response was much different following the recent attacks in Paris highlighting a distinct difference in the two attacks, at least in Obama’s mind. This means the Obama free speech doctrine condones violence to protect his viewpoints.

Obama wanted to implement the fairness doctrine to quiet conservative speech on the radio. However, Obama was not open to implementing a similar policy on other mediums such as the internet or on TV that are dominated by liberal viewpoints.

The Obama administration has lied to the American public about the Benghazi attack and about how America is doing in the war against terror – especially ISIS.

After the passing of ObamaCare, Obama wanted to quiet opponents of the law and tried to implement a “snitching” policy where citizens could report any “bad mouthing” neighbors.

Obama targeted media persons and outlets that did not report on issues in a favorable matter towards the administration (Benghazi). James Rosen (FOX) and Sharyl Atkinson (CBS) were probed by the DOJ. Obama bad mouths FOX News every chance he gets. However, the DOJ never investigated the NY Time and its reporting of sensitive national security material over the killing of Bin Laden and the Stuxnet virus used to slow the Iranian nuclear program. Hence, national security leaks are permissible if and only if it makes the administration look favorable.

Obama targeted conservative groups trying to get tax exempt status through the IRS. Obama wanted to eliminate any effect these groups and their money would have on the 2012 election.

Obama declared the Supreme Court’s “Citizen’s United” decision as one of the worst in U.S. history. Obama does not feel “money” is free speech, but free speech is also freedom of expression. And people use money to express themselves every time they buy a product or service. Once again, Obama wants to narrow the meaning of free speech.

Obama’s non-tolerate free speech doctrine has reached the minority community and our college campuses. Dozens of times conservative speakers have been turned away from universities. A Halloween costume sparked outrage at another school. Black Lives Matter hate speech of killing police officers and their view that only black lives matter is a direct result of Obama prejudice. Obama speaks openly about perceived injustices on blacks only (especially by whites and the police). It is no surprise that violent crime is up in most major cities and against police officers nationwide. How self-centered are these university protesters? They believe their movement is above life. This was apparent when they complained the Paris terrorist attack took media attention away from their effort.

Free speech has been limited in the past, especially during times of war. For instance, in the Supreme Court ruling on Schenck v. United States, the justices stated leaflets containing draft resistance propaganda was a criminal offense. This was a horrible but unanimous decision. The Supreme Court found the basis for their decision from the newly passed Espionage Act of 1917 by Congress which was drafted once the U.S. entered WWI. And it is important to note that the United States was in a declared war at the time of the Schenck ruling. Today, the US is not in a declared war nor is there any type of legislation like the Espionage Act on the books. Remember, Obama moved unilaterally to go to war in Libya and now Syria, so the U.S. may be in a war, but it is not a declared war by Congress. In other words, there is absolutely no reason to mitigate free speech in the US at this time. However, Obama attempts to do it on a daily basis.

No comments:

Post a Comment