Fourth Estate, the fourth branch of government

http://mediamatters.org/items/200607200010

http://mediamatters.org/items/200607260011

Regards,
BiR

 

Am I the only one troubled that some think the First Amendment is a "loophole?"

 

Nope! The words contained therein safeguard some of our most precious liberties.

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.

 

Is that one also a loophole?

 

The Dixie Chicks found out about accountability and freedom of speech.

 

And properly so. If you don't like what they did, don't buy their music, don't go to their concerts.

Even many people who are, like them, ashamed to have Bush as president, didn't like them saying so in another country.

But the proper way to protest is to refuse to buy what they sell. They had a perfect right to say what they think. We have a perfect right to boycott them.

Surprisingly, they are doing very well. Another referendum on Dubya, I suppose.

 

As was the tank their country music career went into for awhile after Natalie mouthed off.

 

What have I said that suggest that I would like the "loophole" of freedom of religion closed? In an earlier post you referred to the freedom of press was a loophole. A few people raised a question regarding that, to which you did not answer. I personally do not see any of the first amendment as a loophole, but I am curious as to how you can see freedom of press as a loophole but not freedom of religon, since they are both stated in the same amendment.

 

Double post..sorry

 

I could not disagree more. The Dixie Chicks exercised their freedom of speech (which BTW, doesn't stop at the U.S. borders), and they paid the price exacted by a free market economy. They can speak, you can choose to not buy their music. That's how it works.

It amazes me how so-called conservatives want the government to fix everything for them that they disagree with. Saying you are ashamed of being from the same place as the president is hardly a crime, moreover, it is the right of anyone to speak their peace. Should Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Paine, Thomas Jefferson, and others have been brought to court or conscripted by some of their comments against King George III? Should the signers of the Declaration of Independence have been jailed for treason? Patriotism is not lockstep support of an administration.

 

EG,

For what? What Natalie Maines said was despicable given that she said it on foreign soil but she has the right to say it. I would have had absolutely NO objection to what she said, though I disagree with it, had she said it in her own country. Had she been sitting in an anti-aircraft turret, as Jane Fonda did, with Taliban or Saddam's troops then charges for treason might be an option. In short, I don't like that she said what she did on foreign soil but she had every right to say it. And, as Galatian said, we still have every right not to buy their music.

And, though I did before, I no longer do.

 

I sure hope fromtheright exemplifies the right, instead of some others here.

When people seriously suggest jailing people for expressing political opinions contrary to the government, we are closer to North Korea than I'd like.

 

I am starting to worry, though, Galatian--I've been agreeing with you far too often lately, it seems.

 

Well, maybe next time, we can talk about the Patriot Act, or something. :laugh:

 

Galatian,

Yeah, I suspect we probably disagree on the PATRIOT Act. Funny thing is, I disagree with almost as many conservatives as liberals on that issue.