Congressman Jim McGovern, a Democrat from the People's Republic Of Massachusetts, has put forth a groovy new progressive amendment to the Constitution, one that will deal with a persistent probelm in America and an ongoing problem for left-wingers everywhere - freedom of speech. It's called the People's Rights Amendment (PRA), and who wouldn't favor something that has the words "People's Rights" right there in it's name ? It must be REALLY groovy, kids, and it's pushback against the Supreme Court's Citizens United ruling.
Here's the text of the PRA:
Section 1. We the people who ordain and establish this Constitution intend the rights protected by this Constitution to be the rights of natural persons.
Section 2. People, person, or persons as used in this Constitution does not include corporations, limited liability companies or other corporate entities established by the laws of any state, the United States, or any foreign state, and such corporate entities are subject to such regulation as the people, through their elected state and federal representatives, deem reasonable and are otherwise consistent with the powers of Congress and the States under this Constitution.
Section 3. Nothing contained herein shall be construed to limit the people's rights of freedom of speech, freedom of the press, free exercise of religion, and such other rights of the people, which rights are inalienable.
House Minority Czar Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) thinks the People's Rights Amendment is supercool. Let's dance !!!
Not to be a buzzkill, but I see a couple problems here.
First, Section 2 of the PRA directly contradicts Section 3. You can't end rights of free speech for corporations and then claim it doesn't limit freedom of the press. Most of the press consists of corporate entities. If corporations don't have free speech, then neither does the New York Times, the Washington Post, NBC, ABC, CBS, FOX, Hollywood, and a slew of other corporate media.
Second, notice who is omitted from the PRA speech police, namely, the unions. If, as Section 1 of the PRA explains, only "natural persons" have free speech rights, and groups of people (corporate organizations) do not, then by definition all groups (organizations) of people shouldn't have them either. Yet, the progressives single out corporations to silence. How convenient for the progressives, since the business sector tends to vote Republican, and the unions tend to vote Democrat. The Democrat-voting group still gets their voice, but the Republican-voting group has to, in Archie Bunker style, stifle it. That's how you know what this amendment is really about, political power and nothing else, regardless of what lipstick the progressives put on their misguided pig.
Like they say, progressives love the Constitution, until it interferes with their plans.
Hey, I'm wondering, if groups of people aren't supposed to have free speech rights anymore, does that mean we won't have to listen to the Democratic and Republican parties ???
About This Blog