Envision how horrific it would be for a plane coming into the airport, to begin landing with the engines at full throttle and never decelerating. Then, as the plane touches down, the pilot fails to apply the brakes. The plane, as it uses up all the runway and approaches a building is steered by the pilot to impact broadside, and rolling the cockpit, the pilot ejected, and is the sole survivor able to walk away. That pilot is none other than Barack Hussein Obama.
When interviewed afterward, he tells us I don't know what happened. When the NTSB looks into the cause of the crash, somehow the input to the blackboxes had been tampered with. All we have is the word of the pilot for what happened, leaving no simple means to verify any theory ascertainable by forensics from the wreckage, and all of which will be deflected, pointing at the pilot with nothing more to say than, “I don't know.”
This is the state of American Government in relation to the people today. The blackboxes are our media, either unplugged, out of presumption of trust in a President who they believe agrees with their ideology, or, now, those in media who don't share that ideology (and therefore look to government with the critical eye expected of the free press) and are put under scrutiny by the government…and yes it's the first time that the First Amendment limits on government have been put to an Executive Branch test to end the Free Press.
Let's look at the First Amendment to understand this narrow area of Constitutional Law that President Obama's White House is pursuing under the idea of “balance”:
“Amendment I
“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.” -- Emphasis mine, http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html.
The inclusion of the word “Congress” here is to make it very clear what branch, the Legislative branch, is prohibited from the activities described in the First Amendment. This could be construed to mean that other branches could have mechanisms, institutions, etc., if they have lawful authority to do so, to carry on activities in the “establishment of religion,” or that could prohibit “the free exercise thereof,” or activities to abridge “freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people to peaceably assemble, and to petition the Government for redress of grievances.”
However, this view is one that is very narrow, but, of course, yours truly has mentioned it on more than one occasion because it is this narrow view at one point in time that Progressive Government in Washington D.C. will eventually have us believing is the principle view, the intentional and purposeful view intended by Our Founders.
The refutation of this view quickly derives from the body of the Constitution itself at Article I, Section 7, in pertinent part:
“Every Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United States: If he approve he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it, with his Objections to that House in which it shall have originated, who shall enter the Objections at large on their Journal, and proceed to reconsider it. If after such Reconsideration two thirds of that House shall agree to pass the Bill, it shall be sent, together with the Objections, to the other House, by which it shall likewise be reconsidered, and if approved by two thirds of that House, it shall become a Law. But in all such Cases the Votes of both Houses shall be determined by yeas and Nays, and the Names of the Persons voting for and against the Bill shall be entered on the Journal of each House respectively. If any Bill shall not be returned by the President within ten Days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, the Same shall be a Law, in like Manner as if he had signed it, unless the Congress by their Adjournment prevent its Return, in which Case it shall not be a Law.
“Every Order, Resolution, or Vote to which the Concurrence of the Senate and House of Representatives may be necessary (except on a question of Adjournment) shall be presented to the President of the United States; and before the Same shall take Effect, shall be approved by him, or being disapproved by him, shall be repassed by two thirds of the Senate and House of Representatives, according to the Rules and Limitations prescribed in the Case of a Bill.” -- Emphasis mine, http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html.
Our Founders, in their great wisdom caused the Limits of the First Amendment to apply to the President of the United States by the operation of a bill becoming a law in the course of the administrative mechanism of American polity prescribed by the Constitution in the first place! Congress cannot make a law without presentation to the President, with exception of achieving a 2/3 vote in both houses of Congress when the President objects to a bill. This is a hurdle for the Congress, put in the Constitution before the Congress' “enumerated” and not general powers are stated in Article I, Section 8, enumerated to assure that only those specific objects are to be contemplated by the national Government to the exclusion of all others.
Now, I must confess I can argue both sides of this narrow view of the First Amendment, and I make this confession to illustrate the fluidity of our Constitution as our tool to use on errant and overzealous government!
The idea of the Constitution as “a living document” has no place as a belief of the government it is constituting, establishing the rules of government legitimacy and authority for. However, this belief does have a very well established place in the heart of the living breathing American.
The ideals of Our Founders are kept alive by We the People, who aren't dead entities created by sheafs of paper but born alive, and whose ability to enforce the principles of self-government, that “Life, Liberty, and pursuit of Happiness” stuff, are the ones who breathe life into the purpose, meaning, and intention of the Constitution as an instrument of the Will of the People. Only by a living being can a group of principles and ideas foster a will, to live, to be free, to enjoy our lives, a will that is kept alive from generation to generation.
The “balance” that President Obama speaks of is a balance where government is beneficiary of our efforts, the thief of our Freedom, and destroyer of Individual Liberty (one moving without the restrictions of government) because his balance is the assertion of government assuming a life of its own, his balance is the act of imposing government's life upon us, making every effort to force recognition of government's life as being more important than our own. President Obama's version of an imbalance is a person operating of their own free will, and apparently he feels the same about the Press.
It was reported Tuesday that The Senate and House are each working on their own legislation to protect reporters. I am not sure if this effort began with the Associated Press story of the Obama Department of Justice's blatant disregard for First Amendment limits on the Constitution in confiscating 2 months of phone records; or if this started since 1 Fox News reporter, James Rosen, has been, for what appears to be the first time in history, accused of a crime in receiving classified information and reporting it, alleged as a reporter to be a co-conspirator to leak classified information by the FBI; or if this started with the investigation of leaks regarding “Fast & Furious” where 2 Fox News reporters were again investigated. In each instance it appears there was no notice from the government and worse: the government violating the computer systems of the businesses these reporters work for (hacking them) to get the personal emails of at least some of these reporters.
And, of course, per the news report, President “Balance” Obama has said he'll sign “whatever bill achieves the balance I want.”
Do you see what Obama is doing? He's forcing Congress to violate the First Amendment prohibitions or find a way to achieve the 2/3 they need to override his veto if they wish to assure the Press is protected from the Executive Branch – DICTATORSHIP ALERT! ANY ALARMS GOING OFF IN YOUR HEAD YET?
I urge you to please share this with your Congressman and Senators, that party affinity must be set aside in order for them to not allow the President of the United States, the Executive Branch, to dictate to the Congress, the Legislative Branch, to violate the most cherished principle of the Bill of Rights, one that assures each and every American has a right to be heard, even when disagreeing with Government, a principle derived from the idea that our Free Speech can force those in government, at least those with a conscience, to be reminded of who they represent and work for: We the People.
I thank you for reading this longer than expected article, and close with an excerpt from Citizens United:
“...The regulatory scheme at issue may not be a prior restraint in the strict sense. However, given its complexity and the deference courts show to administrative determinations, a speaker wishing to avoid criminal liability threats and the heavy cost of defending against FEC enforcement must ask a governmental agency for prior permission to speak. The restrictions thus function as the equivalent of a prior restraint, giving the FEC power analogous to the type of government practices that the First Amendment was drawn to prohibit. The ongoing chill on speech makes it necessary to invoke the earlier precedents that a statute that chills speech can and must be invalidated where its facial invalidity has been demonstrated” -- Emphasis mine, http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-205.pdf.
SARCASTIC DISCLAIMER: Any resemblance of the bold emphasis line above to the violation of probation of the “anti-Muslim” Coptic Christian film maker wrongfully blamed for what happened in Benghazi; or the targeting of Conservative groups by the IRS – the lack of a 501 (c) (4) to “function as the equivalent of a prior constraint” tantamount to “ask[ing] a governmental agency for prior permission to speak”; or the AP story where 2 months of records are confiscated on the idea they'd put American lives at risk if the “press leaked the information” – note that the Press is supposed to disseminate information, that is their job, but apparently now they need the government's permission – is merely your imagination running wild.
I am glad the numerous reporters being singled out at FoxNews, like the singled out Conservative groups by the IRS, didn't suppress their speech, their expression, for that is the very point of this kind of intimidation by tyrannical despotic socialist dictators -- Particularly in going after opposing views with 2 different government agencies, the IRS and DOJ:
Again, thank you for reading & God Bless,
Toddy Littman
