May 19, 2010

Congress attempts to gag bloggers with a sneaky provision in DISCLOSE Act.

"Last week, a congressional hearing exposed an effort to give another agency—the Federal Election Commission—unprecedented power to regulate political speech online. At a House Administration Committee hearing last Tuesday, Patton Boggs attorney William McGinley explained that the sloppy statutory language in the “DISCLOSE Act” would extend the FEC’s control over broadcast communications to all “covered communications,” including the blogosphere.  ...  The bill, however, would radically redefine how the FEC regulates political commentary. A section of the DISCLOSE Act would exempt traditional media outlets from coordination regulations, but the exemption does not include bloggers, only “a communication appearing in a news story, commentary, or editorial distributed through the facilities of any broadcasting station, newspaper, magazine or other periodical publication…”  More here.  (1)

In other words, they will leave the MSM a.k.a. government propaganda outlets with some lattitude but be able to control or intimidate with legal action the alternative media.

As Ed Morrisey pointed out, "If the Democrats in Congress wanted to ensure that the FEC would not investigate political speech by bloggers, they would have written their exemptions to include bloggers instead of just traditional media outlets. The purposeful lack of exemption for bloggers looks ominous indeed — and could be used to harass smaller, unfunded bloggers out of the realm of political debate." More here.  (2)

The bullying never stops.  But it can be understood.  You can take the man out of Chicago but you cannot take Chicago out of the man.  The question is, "Can we stop them in time?"

1.  How the DISCLOSE Act will restrict free speech by Bradley Smith & Jeff Patch
May 18, 2010 at
2.  Congress about to limit political speech of bloggers? May 19, 2010 by Ed Morrissey

Another excommunication implemented

I welcome the honest and consistent implementation of Church discipline by the bishop in Chicago. What I notice with the recent excommunications or recognition thereof is that they’re done on small fishes. I have not heard of disciplinary actions taken against the rich and powerful.

Correct me if I’m wrong, but pro-abortion politicians are not allowed to receive Holy Communion.  How is it that I don't see that restriction applied to Catholics in Congress?  And the late Ted Kennedy who supported abortion all his life, still had a Requiem Mass with Card. Sean O’Malley himself when he died.  And during his life, he was allowed to receive communion prior to the annulment of his marriage in addition to his pro-abortion legislative activities?

Additional comments can be found at the link H/T to Fr. Z 

Excerpt of news report from

A woman who challenged a Catholic ordination ban has died. The Catholic church will not allow her to be buried at a Catholic parish.  Janine Denomme was ordained a priest in April by a group called Roman Catholic Womenpriests. She had been battling cancer and yesterday she died in her Edgewater home.

The Catholic church never recognized Denomme's ordination. The Archdiocese of Chicago says Denomme automatically separated herself from the Church when she participated in "the simulation of the sacrament of Holy Orders." The diocese says she knowingly and willingly participated in the simulation and brought excommunication upon herself. And because of that Denomme is denied a Catholic funeral. The Archdiocese says Denomme would only be allowed a Church burial if she gave "some sign of repentance before death."

Video: Obamacare: More Fraud. Cost +$115 Billion more

Here are more facts from the government that exposes and confirms the fraudulent statements of the sponsors and proponents of Obamacare.  I'll spare you the tirade.  And note if you see this reported in the major networks.
In six months, we'll have a chance to take back our government and undo these take-overs.  But, we need to have at least 66% of Congress to be effective.  (That's what is needed to override the president's veto.)

Popular Posts

Blog Archive