Many people talk about this, but I do not belive that they see the true benefits of such a law. This would keep the unpatriotic hate speech of libs from emboldening the enemy and save more lives. As Americans we should support our leader especially in a time of war, anything less should be treasonous, and punished! Many will say that it is a violation of free speech, but do we not have laws against hate speech? Write your congressmen now!
2007-05-18 04:52:37 · 26 answers · asked by saveusfromhumanism 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Get real libs! I said UNDUE, that means LIES!!! And in case you didnt know, slander is ILLEGAL!
2007-05-18 05:01:45 · update #1
Not a good idea. However tasteless some coments are this is America and people have a right to voice their opinion, however misguided.
2007-05-18 04:57:20 · answer #1 · answered by Brian 7 · 6⤊ 0⤋
You're so right! With all the laws against hate speech we have here in America, (zero) it only makes sense that we have Congress further abridge the freedom of speech, cause there's no constitutional basis for that whole speech freedom thingy, anyway.
And really, when insurgents hear about how Democrats call our president incompetent, forget about the lack of armor, a plan, a goal, or benefits. Forget about our enemies' resolve to kill our troops and each other. Forget about how much easier recruiting for Al-Qaeda and Shi'a militias has been with Coalition troops in Iraq. It's only when the President of the United States is criticized that they really become emboldened. You're SO right about that. Forget that maybe the people criticizing the President, just maybe they are right and the President is wrong. Nope, it's indeed all about the President saving face. How smart you are to have figured that out.
2007-05-18 12:17:26 · answer #2 · answered by prezalex87 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Americans you say, yet what you are suggesting is so American, being American is what gives you the right to question your government, and that is what we are supposed to do, how do you think we came to be Americans, we were under a King and Queen that you were never allowed to question what they said was law, this is not what most Americans want to go back to, although it seems some do want to go back to this system, back to when the world was flat, and everything was dictated to you by your local church, and we burned people at the cross because they believed in something other then the local Church's beliefs, maybe it is time to divide our country and have free America and Christian Fundamental America, we are so far from each other why not just separate and go forward, instead of walking on each other's rights,one can elect a government and the other can just let Bush choose his successor before he dies.
2007-05-18 12:10:40 · answer #3 · answered by Sir Hard & Thick 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Okay, dig up Thomas Jefferson and call him a traitor becaused he urged people to voice disagreement when the government did something wrong. This was to keep accountability and a checks and balances system on the government. Without those checks and balances, it becomes corrupt. Total power is total corruption.
What you are suggesting is censorship and limiting freedom of speech. What is next ...gutting the constitution? Who decides what is said and what isn't? What is good or bad? Most of the people in this country do not support this leader. Most want him gone from office and with good reason. What you are suggesting is to end the rights guaranteed us in the constitution by the founding fathers. Have you read at all about Nazi Germany and how it started? You are an idiot. This president needs to take accountability for his actions and the repercussions to the country. You want a dictatorship.
2007-05-18 12:00:23 · answer #4 · answered by kolacat17 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
As a retired journalist I am against any law that restricts our ability to "report the facts" about what our government is doing or not doing.
On the other hand, I favor prosecuting anyone who employs hate speech or personally attacks anyone when there is no basis in facts. This is my definition of "undue criticism". It becomes "undue" when there are no facts to back it up. We have libel laws to handle this.
It is already a federal crime to threaten the life of the President of the United States, even in jest.
Shame on anyone who employs character assassination to make a political statement. This is vicious and thanks to our founding fathers "nut jobs" or Mussolini-types cannot control our government.
The American people have the right to choose whether to support the President and the war in Iraq, for example.
Media, on the other hand, must go out of its way to present all sides of the argument and let the reader/viewer decide. This, unfortunately has not been the case in regards to President Bush and the war. I am ashamed of what Media has done to the profession of journalism.
___________________________
See: http://on-line-tribune-front-page.blogspot.com
2007-05-18 12:19:47 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
You have the right to criticise the government enshrined in law. To take this away would mean an end to democracy - because it would mean opposing political parties would be forbidden to canvas for support; for instance if they said "The government has taxes too high" that is speaking against the president and would therefore be punishable.
If people dislike the war then they can say so, regardless of how many people agree with them or not. It is not treason to say that the war is a bad idea, treason is ACTIVELY aiding the enemy. I hardly think the insurgents wake up every morning and say "well thank Allah for those liberals, if it wasn't for their support I just don't know how I'd carry on".
2007-05-18 11:57:41 · answer #6 · answered by Mordent 7 · 4⤊ 1⤋
People in Our USA have the right of free speech, which does include the right to disagree and complain about the actions of People in Our Government.
BUT, it does not give Politicians, or their supporters, the right to call the President of the United States vulgar or uncivil names.
But, these people do show us all what type of persons they really are. It should be plain for all to see, that they are not the type of People who should be in Our Government.
2007-05-18 12:08:18 · answer #7 · answered by Sentinel 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Criticism isn't treason. If it were the entire world population would be in prison right now.
If you don't like hearing people criticize a corrupt government and it's cronies, then don't read these boards. Better yet, take your soapbox to Iran, they have your kind of laws.
2007-05-18 12:15:45 · answer #8 · answered by tiny Valkyrie 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
You forget one important factor.
What happens when a 'lib' gets elected president?
You want to have the right to question and criticize them don't you??
The president is not a king - and we have the right to free speech in this country.
Thomas Jefferson said it best: 'Dissent is the highest form of patriotism'
This country wasn't founded by blind followers who would sit down and shut up when they saw something that they disagreed with.
Allowing ideologues and incompetents like Dubya and Dick to go unquestioned is treason.
It's time for impeachment people.
2007-05-18 11:58:41 · answer #9 · answered by Joe M 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Wait did you mean lies like that sadamn had nucs? or that you could just wiretap anybody you want without a warrent? or fire attorneys for political reasons?
What laws are there against hate speech?
This isn't Iran...I can speak out against my government as much as I want. And seriously....you never uttered anything critical about Bill Clinton when he was in office? give me a break.
2007-05-18 12:04:33 · answer #10 · answered by Franklin 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I'm sure such a law is on Bush's wish list, but it would clearly violate our right to free speech. Invading the Arab's homeland has emboldened the terrorists, think about it.
2007-05-18 11:57:47 · answer #11 · answered by Muscat 4 · 3⤊ 2⤋