Skip to main content

FREE SPEECH

Conservatives have all but destroyed democracy in America.  Rather than a country built on the will of the people we are seeing a shift to “one dollar equals one vote”, a system that favors the wealthy in this country who do not want to pay taxes or play by the same rules as the rest of us.

This disintegration has been going on for a long time.  But we had some level of election rules that limited it.  Now it seems all the breaks are off.  It’s like the wild, wild, west.

The Koch brothers and the Tea Party have succeeded in their strategy to “divide and conquer”.  

People focusing on their own interests, and not the interests of others, has left us all vulnerable to the power of the few.

Money influences Congress and money has even influenced the Supreme Court.  An ideology of “wealthy entitlement” permeates politics now.  Congress is no longer influenced by the wealthy it is the slave of them.  

The genie has been let out of the bottle and we can’t hope to get them to put it back.  Congress will not create legislation to curb their addiction to money.  Supreme Court Justices who have taken money from the rich, (shame on you), will not stand up and police their own ranks.

So what do we do?

Here is an idea.  It will take a smart lawyer or many lawyers to accomplish this but we have to do something or lose the principles this nation was built on.  

We have to sue the US Government for breach of contract, specifically the US Constitution’s Freedom of Speech clause.  

First we must establish that free speech is no longer “FREE” in this country.  Note how the wealthy and powerful control all media in this country now and how the government has given them license to do so through the FCC, etc.  Further, prove how the government by allowing for the creation of these “MONOPOLIES” and other “Corporate Monopolies” has limited our free speech rights.

FREE SPEECH should include the right to have Choices and select freely and fairly, products or candidates in a free market economy through competition of quality and value not by buying the media.  This concept should extend to politics as well.  We should have a right to unbiased information in a Democracy when electing our representatives.

The following is an example of the monopoly in media in this country.

These 6 Corporations Control 90% Of The Media In America
(use back button to return to this page after clicking this link)

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/...
Free Speech should be FREE, free for everyone.  The recourse is to sue for equal time and the dismantling of Monopolies in America.  Individuals should have the same rights to advertise on a government sanctioned medium in this country at NO COST as a meter of FREE SPEECH.  Money should no longer give one person or candidate an edge over another due to wealth.  Furthermore, there should be disclaimers clearly indicating when something represents a bias or opinion rather than fact.  You know, like what Fox News does all the time.

You can’t stop money in politics so you have to eliminate the advantage it gives.

This plan includes, Radio, TV, and the US Mail System.  They are all authorized to operate by the government.

Let’s make FREE SPEECH FREE FOR EVERYONE!

It’s “WE THE PEOPLE” not we the Corporation or we the wealthy.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  I can't afford political "free" speech (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    happymisanthropy, Jack Ryan

    It just costs too much!

    Never underestimate stupid. Stupid is how reTHUGlicans win!

    by Mannie on Fri Apr 04, 2014 at 06:56:14 PM PDT

  •  You can lobby... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    BlackSheep1, Gooserock

    ...to reinstitute the Fairness Doctrine on the public airwaves, and break up media monopolies.  I don't think you can or should try to control what gets sent through the mail since that is just a tool that any of us can avail ourselves too.  Also, the word freedom in the first amendment means liberty, not absence of monetary cost.

    •  And the Freedom Belongs to th Artifact or Activity (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      native

      not to any specific kind of speaker.

      And there is no provision at all for informing the people, for hosting civic discourse, not for the benefit of society, humanity, the people or the nation. Obviously the free market, constitutionally forbidden to be regulated or checked or balanced, always provides these services to the best degree possible.

      We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

      by Gooserock on Fri Apr 04, 2014 at 07:56:06 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Free Speech and cost (0+ / 0-)

      I knew the argument of free spech and cost would come up.

      First, we cannot lobby.  We can't even get into the building.  Congress limits access to their building and members.  That is why former Congress members get to be lobbyists.  They continue to have access to other Congressional leaders after their term.

      As for what gets sent through the mail you misunderstand me.  I don't mean to censor anyone.  That would be wrong.  People without money should have the same level of ability to access resourcs as the wealthy do.  We do bulk mail.  Create a category called Political Mail.  Political mail would be free to send and the Government would have to reimburse the Post Office for those who use it.  Just what you all woanted, more junk mail.  It would help the Post Office too...  :)

      quote: means liberty, not absence of monetary cost.

      Didn't Charles Koch in an interview just equate liberty with the lack of monetary cost?  Yep he did.  His liberty is being infringed upon by taxes and regulations.  :)

      goes both ways...

      •  Anyone can literally get into the building. (0+ / 0-)

        Congressional buildings are open to anyone who can clear the metal detectors.  I've successfully made appointments to see members or staff.  You can write, call, etc. and last I check the other first amendment right to petition the government still applies to everyone.

  •  Just imagine Dkos with a Fairness Doctrine. (0+ / 0-)

    The most important way to protect the environment is not to have more than one child.

    by nextstep on Fri Apr 04, 2014 at 08:11:21 PM PDT

  •  Let's require cable companies to carry a channel (0+ / 0-)

    where everyone in the country gets an equal amount of time each year.  To be fair, the time slot a person gets would be random.  In this time each person could address any topic for any level of detail.

    With about 31 million seconds in a year and 310 million people, each person could have 1/10 sec.

    How would you use your 1/10 of a second?

    The most important way to protect the environment is not to have more than one child.

    by nextstep on Fri Apr 04, 2014 at 08:19:29 PM PDT

    •  equal time (0+ / 0-)

      yeah, equal time.
      If we made the media so bombarded with messages then none of them would be effective at propaganda.  
       Marshall McLuhan predicted the Internet and its effect.  With an abundance of messages the ability of any one message to dominate is restricted.  hat is the idea.  You don't censor.  You give more access to all.

  •  Well... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Jack Ryan
    We have to sue the US Government for breach of contract, specifically the US Constitution’s Freedom of Speech clause.
    The amendment doesn't actually say "free speech", it says "freedom of speech", so trying to pivot to "free" = "no cost" doesn't work.

    Behind you on the breakup of media monopolies, though.

    Saint, n. A dead sinner revised and edited. - Ambrose Bierce

    by pico on Fri Apr 04, 2014 at 09:39:49 PM PDT

  •  What about regulation from the other end? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    native

    If giving campaign contributions can't be limited, what about limiting accepting them?  

    Let's have a law that says that any politician who accepts a large amount from any single donor is guilty of presumptive bribery, a (new) impeachable offense which also entails fines and jail time.

    •  I have a hard time believing our Congress members (0+ / 0-)

      would pass any law that limits the amount of money they can receive. It's nice to imagine though.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site