If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Clarification on the President's most recent stupid law
http://news.com.com/Create+an+e-anno...3-6022491.html
"... Our esteemed politicians can't seem to grasp this simple point, but the First Amendment protects our right to write something that annoys someone else. It even shields our right to do it anonymously. U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas defended this principle magnificently in a 1995 case involving an Ohio woman who was punished for distributing anonymous political pamphlets." http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/h...3----000-.html Look at Paragraph h, section B -- telecommunications device does not include an interactive computer service. Imagine that! (h) Definitions For purposes of this section- (1) The use of the term "telecommunications device" in this section- (A) shall not impose new obligations on broadcasting station licensees and cable operators covered by obscenity and indecency provisions elsewhere in this chapter; and (B) does not include an interactive computer service. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Clarification on the President's most recent stupid law
Moon Shyne wrote: http://news.com.com/Create+an+e-anno...3-6022491.html "... Our esteemed politicians can't seem to grasp this simple point, but the First Amendment protects our right to write something that annoys someone else. It even shields our right to do it anonymously. U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas defended this principle magnificently in a 1995 case involving an Ohio woman who was punished for distributing anonymous political pamphlets." http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/h...3----000-.html Look at Paragraph h, section B -- telecommunications device does not include an interactive computer service. Imagine that! (h) Definitions For purposes of this section- (1) The use of the term "telecommunications device" in this section- (A) shall not impose new obligations on broadcasting station licensees and cable operators covered by obscenity and indecency provisions elsewhere in this chapter; and (B) does not include an interactive computer service. Yes, but the law was UPDATED from the original telephone act, boobie. What you quote here is the OLD law, not the new and improved one. - Ronald Poirier ^*^ |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Clarification on the President's most recent stupid law
"Moon Shyne" wrote "... U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas defended this principle magnificently in a 1995 case ...." === Well, there's the leader of the brainstrust. === |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Clarification on the President's most recent stupid law
Gini wrote: "Moon Shyne" wrote "... U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas defended this principle magnificently in a 1995 case ...." === Well, there's the leader of the brainstrust. === Actually, Thomas gets no credit at all for the brillant person that he is. He dissents frequently because he sees the commerce clause of the Constitution as being much more limited in scope than everyone else on the court, including Scalia and the late Reihnquist (sp?). He also gets attacked by democrats a lot. Frankly, it smacks of racism. Harry Reid attacking the intelligence of any Supreme Court Justice is like throwing peas at a semi, pathetic as hell. Unfortunately, the average American has no clue what the majority of the cases in the Supreme Court are about, hell most lawyer's don't know or care, either. Take, for example, the current, "right to die" case. The media reports are pathetic, the reporters do not even understand the issue and try to spin the story as a truly political decision based only on states rights (i.e. federalism) issues, when the decision is really about the interpretation of a statute. Read the thing for yourself. Thomas makes sense, you just have to take the time to read him. Oh yeah, and Thomas is not a conservative per se. His limiting interpretation of the commerce clause can lead to really liberal rulings, like medical marijuana in calfornia. He was with Reihnquist and O'Conner, voting to ALLOW medical marijuana to be used, arguing that the commerce clause did not affect the purely intrastate activity at issue here. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Clarification on the President's most recent stupid law
wrote in message oups.com... Gini wrote: "Moon Shyne" wrote "... U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas defended this principle magnificently in a 1995 case ...." === Well, there's the leader of the brainstrust. === Actually, Thomas gets no credit at all for the brillant person that he is. He dissents frequently because he sees the commerce clause of the Constitution as being much more limited in scope than everyone else on the court, including Scalia and the late Reihnquist (sp?). He also gets attacked by democrats a lot. Frankly, it smacks of racism. == Brilliant? Oh puleeze! The man's a mental lightweight who doesn't belong on the court and it doesn't have a damned thing to do with race (except that he was a token black confirmed by Republicans *because* he was black and they needed to shore up their black base while getting a conservative puppet)! The racism card is the claim his defenders attempt to use when they know they can't defend him on any other grounds. In your clearly unbiased opinion, were the attacks on Anita Hill (most viciously by Arlen Specter) during the confirmation process a result of racism? == |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Clarification on the President's most recent stupid law
Taking our rights away to control information is what the true agenda
is here. stop information flow control the people with the information you want them to see. any one can see this is what is really happening. keep them in the dark to what is really happening. Now they can do what they want with little to no chance of the people interviening. next tep to a police state. lets recap he 1 the patriot act 1 and update and trying to update again. 2 taxing income witch is against the consitution. 3 control the news groups 4 control property owners with permits 5 forcing by lieing to the american people to war with Iraq 6 tax laws introduced reductions that are not reductions at all because the taxes are moved to something else. 7 the domain laws all of them! 8 the fixing of voting booths in Ohio, and Florida 9 the wire taps and internet taps going on still of the american people. 10 the none privaticy act. 11 the right to almost bare arms. 12 the right to not let weman to have birth contral if the seller wishes not to sell them. 13 the congress and the house having the right to give them selfs raise 14 the right to change the consitution to fit their greedy needs I could go on but we get the true picture here by now. Wake up and fight the fight of our lifes. stop them from taking away our rights If it is not in the constitution it is not a law. by them changing the consitution it still is not a law. but they can bully us around because of the power we give them. it is time to take this power back by voting. Votem all out. There is no way some one should be in office for more then 4 year term at 8 year max at a time any way in any branch of the government. But you dont see them rushing to change that law do you. They lost tuch with our reality because of their greed. Vote them out. Do it soon or there will be no rights just a police state ruled by greedy fat cats whom could care less about us, well like now. Dont fall for their lies against people that run against them. Their lies are just to stay in office and not to help us in any way. We are smarter then that. you decide very soon. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Clarification on the President's most recent stupid law
wrote in message oups.com... Taking our rights away to control information is what the true agenda is here. stop information flow control the people with the information you want them to see. any one can see this is what is really happening. keep them in the dark to what is really happening. Now they can do what they want with little to no chance of the people interviening. next tep to a police state. lets recap he 1 the patriot act 1 and update and trying to update again. 2 taxing income witch is against the consitution. 3 control the news groups 4 control property owners with permits 5 forcing by lieing to the american people to war with Iraq 6 tax laws introduced reductions that are not reductions at all because the taxes are moved to something else. 7 the domain laws all of them! 8 the fixing of voting booths in Ohio, and Florida 9 the wire taps and internet taps going on still of the american people. 10 the none privaticy act. 11 the right to almost bare arms. 12 the right to not let weman to have birth contral if the seller wishes not to sell them. 13 the congress and the house having the right to give them selfs raise 14 the right to change the consitution to fit their greedy needs I could go on but we get the true picture here by now. Wake up and fight the fight of our lifes. stop them from taking away our rights We get the picture........you might want to watch out for the black helicopters circling your house tonight.....and don't forget to wear the tinfoil hat. If it is not in the constitution it is not a law. by them changing the consitution it still is not a law. but they can bully us around because of the power we give them. it is time to take this power back by voting. Votem all out. There is no way some one should be in office for more then 4 year term at 8 year max at a time any way in any branch of the government. But you dont see them rushing to change that law do you. They lost tuch with our reality because of their greed. Vote them out. Do it soon or there will be no rights just a police state ruled by greedy fat cats whom could care less about us, well like now. Dont fall for their lies against people that run against them. Their lies are just to stay in office and not to help us in any way. We are smarter then that. you decide very soon. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Eigth Strike?....was.....Someone else Flunks The Question...was.... Four lives lost, though one is still living. | Kane | Spanking | 3 | July 24th 04 06:14 PM |
Another child killed in kincare | Kane | Spanking | 26 | February 17th 04 05:30 PM |
Another child killed in kincare | Kane | General | 39 | February 12th 04 06:55 PM |
Kids should work... | Doan | Spanking | 33 | December 10th 03 08:05 PM |
Kids should work... | Doan | Foster Parents | 31 | December 7th 03 03:01 AM |