Free Speech Triumphs Once Again...Really??
Last comment by Bryant 2 months, 2 weeks ago.

Take Me To Post Comment Form

OK, so the United States Supreme Court has just decided that is all right for people to lie during a political campaign. Well, no, that’s not exactly right, they decided it is all right for a political group to distort the truth about a candidate’s position.

Actually, that’s not exactly correct either. The U.S. Supreme Court said that a group that wanted to put up a billboard in Ohio could challenge an Ohio elections law that prevented political entities from misstating the truth in political advertisements.

The billboard was to state that this particular candidate was supporting the use of federal tax dollars to promote abortion. The candidate alleged that their proposed billboard was lying and had asked the billboard be prevented from being put up under the provisions of this statue. Who was right? Did the billboard lie?

Wait a minute. There’s more. After all was said and done, the owner of the billboard refused to put it up for fear of a lawsuit. On top of that, U.S. Rep Steve Driehaus, a Democrat from Cincinnati, who was being opposed by Republican candidate Steve Chabot, lost his re-election bid without having to answer the billboards statements.

Even more importantly, the question of whether or not anyone’s rights to free speech were violated was then eventually examined by several Ohio courts: after a federal judge said the suit didn’t matter because the request to invoke the law was actually withdrawn by Driehaus, the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati agreed ,stating essentially that the whole matter was moot.

So, considering that the Ohio Elections Commission never really had to make a decision as to whether or not the billboard violated this particular law, why did the U.S. Supreme Court agree to weigh in at all. More confusing, since they did agree to consider the matter, why didn’t they just either strike the law down and be done with it or say, yes, it’s a good law and leave it at that?

As it turns out, many other states have similar laws. Think of all those lawyers in Alaska, Colorado, Florida, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, North Dakota, Oregon, Tennessee, Utah, West Virginia and Wisconsin who might be denied the opportunity to makes gobs of money if the Supreme Court actually had ruled Yay or Nay.

So, why didn’t they at least just agree with the other courts in Ohio and say the issue in Ohio was null and void, for nothing was ever put up that gave anyone a reason to invoke this law. Think of how much hot air such a decision would have prevented from being expelled in at the very least the State of Ohio’s courtrooms.

With the nation’s highest court making such a stellar decision, everyone can now walk away after reading their ruling and go ahead and file more lawsuits in all of these states each and every time some other political entity decides to agree or disagree with a political candidates’ viewpoint and is potentially denied the right to publish it or post it or advertise it. Hallelujah! This truly is freedom of speech at its very best!


Latest Activity: Jun 16, 2014 at 3:15 PM


Bookmark and Share
Forward This Blog
Print Blog
More Blogs by Regional
Send Regional a Message
Report Inappropriate Content


Blog has been viewed (1104) times.

theflyonthewall commented on Monday, Jun 16, 2014 at 16:18 PM

The case illustrates the great need for campaign reform. Candidates having a large war chest can spend more on advertising and facile lawyers. Too many candidates have also learned the benefits of the big lie: anything repeated enough eventually becomes the truth. In a better world ,members of both parties could work together to solve this problem.

gawalkman commented on Monday, Jun 16, 2014 at 20:22 PM

Who is the bigger fool? The liar or the one who believes the liar?

theflyonthewall commented on Monday, Jun 16, 2014 at 20:28 PM

The liar is no fool because cheaters do prosper..Whether the liar has a conscience or any scruples at all is another matter.

Bryant commented on Tuesday, Jun 17, 2014 at 18:13 PM

Those who decry "activist" courts and judges as infringing upon states rights for abortion rulings should be just as upset, if not more so. by this travesty. Unfortunately, the politicians benefiting from such prevarications can always distance themselves, "I did not approve this ad".

Both political parties are guilty (or should I say PACs supporting both political parties?).


Log In to post comments.

Previous blog entries by Regional
 
Map Story Of Ukraine Conflict
August 29, 2014
why all the fighting in the ukraine....from what started as an internal disagreement turned into a total breakdown of rule and order.... this obvious loss of control over the far away eastern region, long ignored by kiev politicians and feeling very upset about conditions in their cities... these feelings gave ...
Read More »
 
Islam: why different sects?
August 24, 2014
There have been seventy-two different sects in the Islamic religion recorded by Islamic historians Munshi Mehmoob ‘Alim and Abu-Manus al-Baghdadi. Some of them became political sects as well, while some of them rejected fundamental parts of the Islamic faith. Curiously enough, “Caliph Ibrahim” of the new Islamic State is known ...
Read More »
 
Ferguson: The Facts
August 21, 2014
At first glance, and if you believed what the parents and friend of the young man who was shot and killed said of the incident and their son, this young black man had been gunned down execution style, shot in the back as he walked away from the police officer ...
Read More »
 
Robin Williams is Gone...A Tragic Loss
August 12, 2014
It is hard to imagine, but actor Robin Williams is dead, apparently by his own hand. According to reports, he had recently checked himself into a clinic to attempt to ensure his sobriety, for he had been very depressed as of late. His wife, graphic designer Susan Schneider, whom he ...
Read More »
 
Israel and Hamas: Who is in the right?
August 06, 2014
Hallelujah! Hamas has finally agreed along with Israel to a cease-fire for 72 hours, based on the exact same conditions to stop fighting as the cease-fire they refused to sign off on one month ago. Too bad that Hamas actually rules Gaza and the Gazans have no say in their ...
Read More »
 
[View More Blogs...]





 
Powered by
Morris Technology