Limiting Free Speech

Free Speech Limits 00

You may very well have “missed” it.

But at her first 2016 campaign stop in Iowa, “wannabe” president Hillary Clinton called for a “constitutional” amendment to “limit free speech rights” granted by the Supreme Court to unions, companies and organizations donating to “political” campaigns.

Few might have expected the ex-Obama “aide” to kick off her second bid to “infiltrate” the Oval Office with such a proposal for “fundamental change” in settled American law.

But there she was, wearing an “uber-smile” with more media than “audience” at Kirkland Community College in Monticello.

First, she “modestly” portrayed herself as somewhat “courageous” for taking on some “evil” special interest groups. Because, as her “divisive” mentor Barack Obama so “ably” shows, you must have a “Them” to create an “Us.” Hillary proclaimed:

Free Speech Limits 02

“I want to be the champion who goes to bat for Americans in four big areas, four big fights that I think we have to take on because there are those who don’t agree with what I think we should be doing. And they’re pretty powerful forces.”

Topic One: “We need to build the economy of tomorrow, not yesterday.” Take that, Marco Rubio, who’s called her a yesterday leader.

Topic Two: “We need to strengthen families and communities because that’s where it all starts.” Remember her 1996 book, “It Takes a Village”?

Topic Three: “We need to fix our dysfunctional political system and get unaccountable money out of it once and for all—even if that takes a constitutional amendment.”

Topic Four: “We need to protect our country from the threats that we see and the ones that are on the horizon.”

Free Speech Limits 05

Wait! What? Yup, the woman with her own “PAC’s” who could spend upwards of $1.7 billion on her “campaign” is taking on the “2010 Citizens United Supreme Court” decision. That one granted “free speech” spending rights to “nonprofit” organizations in the “political” process, since expanded to “unions and corporations.”

Purposely not specific. With Clinton, “threats” could be anything from the “vast right-wing conspiracy” to the “media” to maybe even “terrorism” threats that have “exploded” since she took office as Secretary of State in early 2009.

Free Speech Limits 06

You may recall Barack Obama “violating” political protocol in his 2011 State of the Union address to “criticize” the Citizens “decision” of Supreme Court justices, sitting silently, politely right in front of him. “Citizens United” is an issue “near and dear” to the mechanical pumps that pass for “hearts” in the left-wing of the Democrat Party.

You may also recall that an “over-confident” Clinton, obviously the party’s “nominee-to-be” in 2008, was badly “embarrassed” in the Iowa caucuses, finishing a sad “third” behind Obama, and even that North Carolina “adulterer,” John Edwards, who cheated on his “dying” wife.

Free Speech Limits 03

So, the Clinton’s not taking any “chances” this time, touching all the “pander” bases.

And her “minions” are keeping the “rowdy” media and “unapproved” everyday Americans at bay. So, there have been no “tasteless” questions so far about “Benghazi” or her suspicious deleted “emails” distracting from her prescribed message: “I want to be the champion who goes to bat for everyday Americans.”


The thing about every “everyday” American is that for an entire quarter “century” now the Clinton’s have been “intimately” associated with “big” money. Actually, “huge” money.

Remember them “renting” out the Lincoln Bedroom to donors? “Lifting” White House furniture and china on the way out. Their “twin” mansions. “$100 million” plus from Bill’s speeches. “$300K” for a Hillary speech. Chartered “jets.” Millions pouring into their “foundation” from foreign governments, while Mrs. Clinton was doing her “mediocre” job at State and “ignoring” Benghazi’s pleas for “more” security.


That’s what made Hillary’s “dead broke” claim so hilarious last fall. And why her current plaints about “income inequality” prompt snickers.

Of course, both “parties” bitterly cling to a few “evergreen” issues they cynically never “intend” to solve. This week a Citizens United constitutional “amendment” is Hillary’s. There’s as much chance of that happening as Obama ever sincerely “thanking” anyone.

Getting three-quarters of the “states” to agree on anything today is impossible. Especially if the “idea” is a Democrat’s and 31 of Obama’s “57” states are run by Republican governors.


Clinton said one other thing in Monticello that stuck out. “We’ve got to figure out in our country how to get back on the right track.” Her feigned concern is correct, “two-out-of-three” Americans do think the country is on the “wrong” track.

But here’s her problem. Obama has been in “office” now 2,276 days. Hillary Clinton was a senior Obama “cabinet” member for 65% of that time.

Wrong “track” is on them. Clinton now claiming an important need to “switch” tracks is like Obama “shaking” his head at this awful “ongoing” Bush economy.

Free Speech Limits 01

Hillary Clinton released an “announcement” over Memorial Day weekend on her “Facebook” page, saying that what we may think of as “free speech” can be hurtful towards other Americans, and we should put more effort into “monitoring” what we and others say to avoid “painful” dialogues, especially on the Internet.

“There is a problem in this country when people, mostly right-wing bigots, can easily inflict pain and suffering towards others through hurtful words and objections against alternative lifestyles and political stances. You often see it on Facebook and other forms of social media, where they are constantly spewing hate and intolerance. I wish I could tell you just how many times I’ve read mean-spirited posts about me on the Internet, and I can assure you that when I become President, things like that will no longer happen. I already have a list of people, thousands of names, who will feel my righteous wrath when I take office.”

Free Speech Limits 07

It remains “unclear” how exactly the 2016 presidential “hopeful” is planning to “redefine” constitutional limits on “free speech.”

Soon after Hillary’s comment was posted, it sparked much “controversy” and was quickly “removed” from her timeline, but this didn’t stop the flood of “approving” comments from page followers, most of whom used Clinton’s “H” logo as their profile picture.

Free Speech Limits 04

Many conservatives were “shocked” by how quickly Clinton supporters turned to calling for “violence” towards those who voiced “criticism” of the Democratic “presidential” hopeful.

Some comments went as far as demand that “cartoonists” who drew Hillary Clinton be “imprisoned” for blasphemy and “executed,” or else they should expect “attacks” on their offices.

Hillary Queen Bee

Within minutes of the “original” Facebook post, Mrs. Clinton and her staff had to “disable” comments on her page due to the overwhelming “enthusiasm” of her supporters demanding “arrests, public lashings, and executions of those who slander the name of Hillary Clinton.”

Clinton’s “opponents,” who expressed their “objections” to the violent “outbursts” on her Facebook page, were “bombarded” with unending replies containing “threats and insults,” which implied that angered Hillary “supporters” knew their “real” names and where “they” lived.

In one example, an “elderly” woman from Louisiana who expressed her “criticism” of Hillary Clinton with a one-word comment, “distrustful,” had Clinton supporters go to her Facebook page, “retrieve” names and photographs of the woman’s grandchildren, and use that information to “threaten” her with violence through personal messages.


Complaints about online “violent threats and bullying” in connection with a presidential “candidate” had Secret Service “take down” the names of Facebook users who were “critical” of Clinton. Some of them were “contacted” personally and had all their electronic equipment “removed,” while others were placed under “close” surveillance.

Facebook Standards

Following its own “guidelines” against online bullying and threatening comments, “Face Book” staff suspended “online” accounts of conservative “users” whose posts contained “criticism” of Hillary Clinton until the “issues” are fully investigated.

The tentative “completion” date of the investigation is expected “Next Tuesday,” November, 2016.

Free Speech

Meet Hillary.
Hillary Movie.
This starts with you.


Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: