Hillary still trying to gag opposition to her candidacy

I don’t know about yours, but my vote is not for sale, despite what Hillary Clinton says.

Today she revealed her plans to combat “secret” or “dark” money being spent on politics.

Clinton and Obama during debate. (AP photo)

She specifically wants to overturn by hook or by crook the Supreme Court ruling in Citizens United, which held that that organization had the right to air a movie called “Hillary: The Movie.”

The FEC blocked airing the movie because of provisions of the McCain-Feingold Law that required disclosure of the group’s donors and a disclaimer at the end of each ad.

Clinton’s website proclaimed that the “Citizens United case helped unleash hundreds of millions of dollars of secret, unaccountable money into U.S. elections that is drowning out the voices of ordinary Americans and distorting our democracy. ”

But Justice Anthony Kennedy, writing for the majority in the 5-4 ruling in Citizens United, spelled out that censorship was unconstitutional on its face:

“The law before us is an outright ban, backed by criminal sanctions. Section 441b makes it a felony for all corporations — including nonprofit advocacy corporations — either to expressly advocate the election or defeat of candidates or to broadcast electioneering communications within 30 days of a primary election and 60 days of a general election. Thus, the following acts would all be felonies under §441b: The Sierra Club runs an ad, within the crucial phase of 60 days before the general election, that exhorts the public to disapprove of a Congressman who favors logging in national forests; the National Rifle Association publishes a book urging the public to vote for the challenger because the incumbent U. S. Senator supports a handgun ban; and the American Civil Liberties Union creates a Web site telling the public to vote for a Presidential candidate in light of that candidate’s defense of free speech. These prohibitions are classic examples of censorship.”

But Clinton declared she will appoint justices who would overturn this ruling and/or amend the “Constitution to allow Americans to establish common sense rules to protect against the undue influence of billionaires and special interests and to restore the role of average voters in elections.”

Common sense? Thomas Paine’s “Common Sense,” advocating the Revolution was printed anonymously. Hillary would have banned it. Also the Federalist Papers and the Anti-Federalist Papers were printed under pseudonyms. Hillary would have banned them.

She also wants to establish matching funds for small donations. Though she never says where the match will come from, presumably it would come from tax money, which would mean you might be paying to support a stance with which you disagree. Clearly a First Amendment violation.

Hillary Clinton apparently assumes American voters are just too stupid to be exposed to points of view with which she disagrees and those voices should be gagged. If she is correct, this experiment with a democratic republic is a failure.

Hillary actually released a video explaining how she opposed a movie that specifically attacked her:

Citizens United reportedly is at work on “Hillary: The Sequel.”

Free speech is meant to give all citizens access to every viewpoint available. Just because a union or a corporation is an assemblage of people pooling their resources to make their message more loudly and frequently heard does not make that message automatically inferior and unworthy of dissemination. The citizens, the voters are perfectly capable of rejecting a bogus argument no matter how much money is spent on it.

If you can’t win the debate, gag your opponent.

16 comments on “Hillary still trying to gag opposition to her candidacy

  1. Rincon says:

    Democracy is pretty much dead in this country anyway. The Citizens United decision is merely one more nail in the coffin. The power of mass media is greatly magnified by scientists who study human behavior and ways to manipulate our thoughts. Years ago, they called the techniques discovered by these scientists and others brainwashing. Today, any person or corporation with enough money can avail themselves to the power of these techniques and they do on a regular basis. Propaganda is everywhere, only it’s not wielded by Nazis or Communists, but rather capitalists and “journalists” – along with the government and government officials. Lies told often enough become perceived as truth. With the power of mass media, telling lies often is child’s play. Although an opponent is “free” to respond, the tolerance of journalistic malpractice and the wide dissemination of misinformation is great enough that the public has no realistic way to decide truth. He who spends the most money gains the most credibility. For some reason, our society has become blind to the concept of fraud. One only has to look at the quack remedy industry in this country to see the evidence of that.

    In the case of global warming, most of us here wouldn’t know climate physics if it bit us in the butt, yet we’re adamant that our view is correct. We rely on our experts to guide us, but some of those experts are outright frauds, but which ones? The nature of our propagandized society and the effectiveness of the puppet masters is such that somewhere near half of us are being fooled, but don’t know it. Why do we tolerate all of this lying and outright fraud? Because of our belief that with free speech, the truth will win out. Not today. Today, those with the money manipulate the rest of us like puppets and most of us don’t even know it.

    In the era of MSNBC and Fox News, journalism has descended from a high calling to a set of propaganda machinery. Editorials are commonly printed as news articles and those labeled editorials are routinely an exercise in hiding truth and spewing only what the journalist wants the audience to know.

    It is illegal to give a wino a bottle of wine to have him vote the way you ask, but anonymously spending millions or billions of dollars on a fraudulent campaign, guaranteed to buy more votes than there are winos is “free speech” according to the law. At the very least, the owners of our corporations, that is, the stockholders, deserve to know who the entity they own is contributing to. Sadly, the law prevents this knowledge. For that matter, it might also be worthwhile if a corporation’s customers knew as well. Would you be as likely to buy products from a company if it was actively contributing to say, a new party advocating sharia law?

    Why is it that we require all kinds of transparency from our elected officials, but none whatsoever from their masters?

  2. Another opinion that voters are too stupid to discern.

  3. Patrick says:

    Corporations are not people and the Constitution never recognized any “rights” of any corporations.

    The recognition of rights, of corporations therefore, is judicial activism of a most heinous nature.

    There doesn’t need to be a Constitutional Amendment added, the Constitution merely need to be read and followed to deny any protection to of free speech (and any other right for that matter recognized by the Constitution) to a corporation or a union, or any other legal fiction.

  4. Rincon says:

    I don’t think it;s voter stupidity so much as a learned helplessness. Determining who is telling the truth or at least not stacking the deck is very difficult – too difficult. The global warming thing is a good example. I think those who participate here are of above average intelligence (yes, even the Liberals), but we disagree strongly on global warming. The misinformation of at least one side is fraud or at least close to it, yet whichever side is being fooled is completely convinced that it’s the other side who is misinformed, to the point where many Conservatives have called it a hoax. If a fraud (hoax) this huge and scrutinized as much as this is can be successfully carried out, then imagine how much misinformation and fraud exist in those areas less studied.

    And of course, if the public was well informed and in control of the levers of power, it seems unlikely that 10% of our people could successfully walk away with 100% of the profits from the doubling of our productivity in the last 50-60 years. A little mind control goes a long way.

  5. Steve says:

    I run into the very thing Rincon describes on Facebook, almost daily.
    The memes forwarded as though they are gospel are easy to check and usually very wrong. But those posting them believe in them enough to respond defending them when I show them things (I find Snopes works the best and shows up the most, though there a lot of fact checking websites) showing the trusted meme they have liked and shared is a lie.
    I do this to conservative and liberal friends alike.

    While some people are desperate to believe, I find most are willing to accept the facts once they are made clear.
    I think people are fully capable of seeing through the cheesecloth being pulled over our eyes.

  6. Rincon says:

    WE need more people like you, Steve. Well, maybe just a touch more liberal 🙂

    I do the same thing. Unfortunately, for every one message that someone like us corrects, there may be hundreds of messages that go through without correction and people often believe them. It’s also much harder to overcome the Sean Hannity/Keith Olbermann method of speaking in half truths or the MSNBC/Fox News bias.

  7. Steve says:

    More like millions. FB passed a the billion consecutive login milestone a couple weeks ago.

    Funny, Hannity and Olberman have no pants on fire but Rachel Maddow made that grade!

    Search all of them here;

  8. Vernon Clayson says:

    My heart didn’t stop but it stuttered when I read the line about this terrible woman appointing Supreme Court justices,think of the horror of that scenario.

  9. Athos says:

    Hillery makes me gag. What’s the penalty for treason in our fair land? I have two ripe subjects for it!

  10. Rincon says:

    Interesting link Steve. I’ve never looked at it until now. Seems that indeed, the mouthpieces for the political extremes can’t be trusted. When I add up the statements that were determined to be half true, mostly false, false and pants on fire, Hannity is the boring one at only 60%. Maddow is next at 63, Olbermann at 72 and our winner, Rush at a very impressive 81% with a whopping 26% pants on fire and only 19% true or mostly true. Congratulations Rush! It must take a great deal of talent and discipline to lie so often and still seem credible to so many. It’s a shame Politifact doesn’t rate the think tanks. I think some of them might have outdone even Rush. Welcome to the great American pastime – lying through one’s teeth.

    Totally free speech isn’t working all that well. No wonder nobody can agree. Our “truths” are manufactured. Any resemblance to the real truth is purely coincidental. And the reward for consistently deluding the American people is fame and fortune plus the blind trust of millions. In the immortal words of Yakov Smirnoff, what a country! Needs to be fixed, but the Conservatives would never have it.

  11. Hillary’s song of the week…as she re-launches her campaign for the umpteenth time…

  12. Steve says:

    Rush Limbaugh coined the word “infotainment”.
    In his case that is all it is. He gets to claim poetic license. I looked at his TV show a few times, he was good for laughs, his radio show made the FM dial a few years ago, proving he is all about entertainment and the almighty dollar.

    He shouldn’t even be considered a pundit anymore.

  13. Rincon says:

    I wonder where the “info” in infotainment comes from. Oh, I see. There’s a little real information buried in the lies. The “tainment” part is trying to find it. The man has done a lot of damage over the years. I have several friends and relatives who still insist that he tells only truth.

  14. Or…if you’re one of the sycophant true believers in the progressive leftist “first woman president” hype (like the Alternative Women’s Choir)…you replace Jesus with Hillary while desecrating an old gospel song…
    Well, woke up this mornin’
    With my mind, stayin’ on Jesus Hillary
    Woke up this mornin’
    With my mind, stayin’ on Jesus Hillary
    Halleluh, halleleluh

  15. Well, woke up this mornin’
    With my mind, stayin’ on Hillary
    Woke up this mornin’
    With my mind, stayin’ on Hillary
    Halleluh, halleleluh

  16. mb says:

    I tend to ignore the elitist voice who claims to be only looking out for me.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s