Civil Rights

Land of the Free

Land of the Free (4/27/2011)

Our national anthem brings pride unto ourselves when we quote the famous lines, “O’er the land of the free and the home of the brave.” Sadly, since that fateful night at Fort McHenry I would offer the founding fathers fight against royal tyranny for liberty and our forefathers shedding blood for future generations has been usurped by complacency. Examples abound in our current society of both the loss of freedom and lack of bravery.

A December 4, 2006 column in the Russian paper, Pravda, makes reference to “A record 7 million people – or one in every 32 American adults – were behind bars, on probation or on parole by the end of last year’, and when these figures are added to the estimated 1 million prisoners of war held by the United States, all around the World, the once great American Nation has now become the greatest jailer of human beings the World has ever known.” Laws such as “Three Strikes” have increased our incarceration rate for even the pettiest of crimes. Even the truly law-abiding are not free. Consider random traffic stops to check your license and insurance, TSA airport searches, security screenings to enter a public event, and proof of identity requirements for job applications and opening bank accounts. Exacerbating the situation is claims these freedoms are taken in the name of liberty.

Ironically, even bravery has been eroded out of fear of consequences. Questioning TSA regarding the 4th amendment and basis for searching six-year olds will prevent you from flying. Publicly videotaping law enforcement creates a fast path to court with criminal charges. My favorite example occurred two weeks ago: Juror 799, an Asian woman in her 20s, when asked to name three people she least admired on her juror questionnaire, wrote: “African-Americans, Hispanics and Haitians.” In the land for the free and home of the brave the woman was sentenced to indefinite jury duty by Federal Judge Nicholas Garaufis – a unilateral decision with no crime committed.

I challenge you to listen carefully to political demagoguery and proposals to “make you safer.” Blood was shed September 3, 1814 to capture freedom and liberty for future generations whilst Francis Scott Key watched the fight and immortalized his feelings. Sadly, our former enemies in Russia watch our freedoms erode and write about it, but the timidity bred into our generations of children makes them blind to the blood given for their liberty and they will not stand bravely for themselves.

Homework

My daughter’s homework recently piqued my interest while she was studying for an exam. Currently, she’s taking an American Government class; learning about types of government like authoritarian, dictatorship, oligarchy, and democracy. During our studying though we came to a handout that forced me to question today’s teaching as it focused on explaining the role of government. It is this question that divides left and right, Democrat and Republican. Personally I have a strong libertarian view which believes in a very limited role of government.

Reviewing her handout I learned there are seven roles taught to today’s students: defense, taxation, judiciary, education, health care, transportation, and economy. I wondered how many Thomas Jefferson would include on the list and speculated three: defense, taxation, and judicial review. Seeking a more definitive answer I found only defense and judicial protection receive consensus and without taxation the rest of the list cannot exist. Sadly, I think our country has reached a crossroads in development: we can have freedom and independence to control our lives with no government involvement but risk personal loss and failure, or we can mutually combine all of our earnings and share the bounty regardless of productivity to protect our entire society against any calamity that may befall us.

I believe the second option has been tried repeatedly throughout history and most recently by the idealist Karl Marx in a quest to end class struggles; recognizing the needs of the proletariat against the bourgeoisie. Modern communism expanded on the efforts of Marx’s writings with Lenin and then Stalin accelerating its spread; dictatorial regimes use communism to disguise their own human rights atrocities. Many would claim the U.S. has recently failed at the longest running experiment in capitalism and laissez faire economics allowing business to overrun the working class. However, a quick glance at American history confirms anyone, regardless of status, education, or connection can succeed to enormous wealth, unlike communist nations allow. Successes like Bill Gates, Larry Page, and Jeffrey Bezos abound and even Presidents Clinton and Obama come from the poorest of backgrounds and family struggles.

Ayn Rand concisely describes the role of government “as, the police, to protect you from criminals; the army, to protect you from foreign invaders; and the courts, to protect your property and contracts from breach or fraud by others.” I believe the role of government is to allow me freedom of choice – to succeed or fail

February 16, 2011 by admin Big Government Civil Rights sheep taxes

Cairo – Do Americans Riot?

Several weeks ago uprisings in Tunisia dominated the evening news and daily papers. Most Americans are quick to dismiss such events, and why not? Steven Tyler’s performance on “American Idol” or the choosing of 20-something millionaires to play in the Super Bowl delude the masses; appearing far more important than citizens risking their lives for freedom. I too have felt the challenge to understand, but in college I watched Chinese students challenge communist regime and ultimately give their lives in Tiananmen Square to demonstrate the human rights violations of their government. Growing up I knew the communists of the U.S.S.R. regularly violated individual freedoms and imprisoned citizens behind the iron curtain. Through Hollywood movies I learned more about the fight after World War II and my history classes tried to explain the actions of authoritarianism and dictatorships.

Although many arguments about the cause may be made, the issues in Cairo this week are driven by 30 years of authoritarian rule under President Hosni Mubarak and a discontent youth rebelling against his authority. But the recent riots are not new, and by no means ultimately represent the underlying problems in a country desirous of democracy but operating with an ancient mentality. On November 24, 2010 a Christian was killed, 100 arrested and 3,000 demonstrators protested the razing of a new Christian church built without a permit. Under Ottoman law a permit is required to build a Christian church, in contrast Mosques are built easily and regularly without review of a state authority. Today many assertions are being made in the media that the riots are religious in nature, but local reporting and blogging, held an opposite view. Instead, the riots are the result of 30 years of oppression and dictatorship and inspired by the Jasmine Revolution in Tunisia.

As the World’s policeman the American citizenry believes our own government is above such actions and the riots we watch overseas could not occur here. My wife and I had a conversation this week about Americans and whether riots would take place here. Coincidentally I am reading a book, “The Emerging Police State” by William Kunstler and together we watched “Battle in Seattle,” chronicling protests against the World Trade Organization. Skeptically I listen to the outrageous conspiracy claims of Alex Jones and wonder if any truth inspires. As I learn more though I have discovered striking parallels between the radical claims of the left and the right; the common thread leading to a questioning of our government’s actions. Uprisings have occurred on our soil, and many are similar to Egypt: spurred by youth and ideological believers desperate for change and an opportunity to be heard. Sadly, like Egypt, death has come upon those who question the United States government or the corporations profiting and seeking protections through the rule of law.

Kunstler’s book is a compilation of speeches made through the years and inspired by his battles for justice. In my opinion it is easy to condemn the actions of those we do not like, but it is more important to defend the application of justice when we like it least. From a speech in 1971, with memories of Kent State fresh, long forgotten to the annals of time and unknown to anyone under age 40 today, he indicts the government for condoning the slaughter of unarmed students, using the law to fabricate evidence and justify its actions. In the most disgusting example, the Grand Jury which is supposed to provide protection from the law, but serves as an agency of the government, found the National Guard justified in shooting, although no student sniper existed and it was a Major’s discharge of his sidearm that prompted spraying the crowd with bullets. Furthermore, the Grand Jury recommended .22-caliber bullets should be used against future student demonstrators instead of the larger, more harmful caliber M-1.

Forty years later, in the summer of 2010, Pittsburg was shut down and noise suppression cannons were used to hold off G-20 demonstrators. No one was killed, but our government has mechanisms to slow and prevent demonstrations. Likewise, the movie “Battle in Seattle” shows the offensive measures police and National Guard took against WTO protesters in 1999. Since then “Exclusion Zones” have been created and are defined as “areas where protesters are legally prohibited.” A quick read of the Bill of Rights contradicts this as the Congress was prohibited from passing any law interfering with the right to peacefully assemble. Without protest though, we have sheepishly allowed court rulings to support the establishment of Exclusion Zones and Free Speech Zones, often located miles from the desired protest site and set behind concrete barriers, fencing, and razor wire.

Watching from a distance this past week I am concerned our government and media does not condemn Egypt’s actions to shut down the internet and communications. With bi-partisan support the Senate is prepared to again introduce legislation to create an “Internet Kill Switch.” In Egypt stopping communication has become necessary to thwart organizing by protesters. I believe many Americans view such actions as part of their perception of safety, but I counter it is another step in the incremental destruction of our freedoms. When challenged, a congressional white paper on the measure said the proposal prohibits the government from targeting websites for censorship “based solely on activities protected by the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.” Ironically, the same language is used in the Patriot Act.

Our country is radically changing, not in terms of Democrat versus Republican, but government and corporations versus citizenry. Each of the Amendments of the Bill of Rights has been usurped over the last 40 years to protect the state and corporation. Meanwhile we have sat idly by accepting, like children, the supposed safety created in exchange for liberty. We have watched legislation pass that punishes minorities and the indigent in greater numbers. Currently the mainstream populace finds itself victim to the banking, mortgage, and credit fraud perpetrated by the elite few and legitimized by Congress. I challenge you to understand why youth in Egypt are risking their lives against oppression, question why Icelandic people rioted to avoid the indebtedness of the banks, why 170,000 TSA employees have the freedom to ignore the Fourth Amendment, and why both sides of Congress support legislation to cut communications via the Internet. From the comfort of our homes it is safer to let others protest and not put ourselves at risk. I think the answer to my wife’s question about whether Americans riot is easy, “the passionate due, the idle don’t.”

February 12, 2011 by admin Civil Rights Controversy Muslim Terrorists

Welcome 2011 (aka 1984)

Orwell’s 1984 is an unbelievable tale imagined in 1949 focusing on government surveillance and mind control. Since 9/11 Americans have followed the Orwellian path: trading liberty for the perception of safety. Like Sheep, there is no resistance stepping into body scanners, allowing our mothers, daughters, and wives submission to hands of questionable authority, and acceptance of cameras and data mining to predict actions. Our same ruling elite, like the “Inner Party” exempts itself from the rules and regulations put upon “We the People”.

My goal is not to pontificate doom and gloom, but raise awareness and challenge the status quo. I must wonder why a NFL football dominates television ratings when our society is collapsing around us. Much of the change thrust upon us was incrementally small and came slowly after 9/11. However, I believe there has been an acceleration of lost liberties in the last two years. For example: a pilot challenging TSA’s procedures last week had his home raided by Federal Authorities under administrative rules creating a warrantless search; TSA announced further silly rules scrutinizing Thermos bottles; passengers cannot take water through security as it may explode; Wired magazine detailed government collection and scrutiny of credit card and store loyalty card data; Google through StreetView and other data mining practices announced predictive behavioral searches; municipalities are investing in license plate readers to track all traffic in their communities; you cannot enter a store or public place without CCTV recording and forever storing your image; without warrants the NSA is listening to phone and email traffic; purchase of certain over-the-counter drugs requires logging your identity in a government database although no law is broken; Attorney General Eric Holder shared in an interview with Diane Sawyer last week American citizens require surveillance to stop homegrown terror; passage of Net Neutrality was the first step toward an ID requirement to access the web; and Janet Napolitano announced Wal-mart will install televisions nationwide to broadcast the “If you See Something, Say Something” campaign encouraging us to report on others.

I do not have confidence in the government, nor do I trust the government to maintain its integrity. By the government’s admission we need to question those who exercise First Amendment Rights, have certain political bumper stickers, belong to organizations like the NRA, and criticize the United Nations. As 2011 comes upon us I challenge you to watch the weekly announcements of new government “security” programs and ask, “Why?” Big Brother is watching you. – George Orwell.

December 29, 2010 by admin Big Government Civil Rights Stupid People

Free Speech

I argue the most important freedom we have under the Constitution is the right to Freedom of Speech. It is interpreted as the right to speak freely without censorship or limitation. As defined in our own First Amendment to the Constitution, “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.”

Sadly though, something happened over the last century, accelerating rapidly over the last two decades. I previously wrote freedom of speech must remain free of tests, and the most important speech is one making us uncomfortable, but yet allowed. It is free speech protecting news media, web sites, and our access to information. We take for granted the freedom of the Internet and our assumed rights to read, review, and see any content. Of course, we are aware countries like China and North Korea censor their citizens’ access to web sites and news, especially political discourse contradicting their governments. We assume this will not happen in America, but quite the opposite is true.

Last week Senator Lieberman proudly announced his success pressuring Amazon.com to remove Wikileaks from its servers. Bill O’Reilly called for the execution of Wikileaks’ Julian Assange on his television show and Sarah Palin similarly did the same. The narrow-mindedness of these pundits is more concerning than the actions of Assange. Our willingness to have “hate speech” protections in America caused a young man in Kentucky to find himself sentenced to prison for three years last week after writing a poem titled, “The Sniper,” a concerning poem narrating the assassination of President Obama, but one that should be protected by the First Amendment nonetheless.

Many would argue some speech is bad, but I assert you must accept all speech to truly enjoy freedom of speech. The writings of Thomas Paine and Thomas Jefferson granted our liberties and released us from tyranny. Using today’s standards their writings are treasonous and require “balance” and an investigation by Homeland Security would ensue with both men finding themselves on Domestic Terrorist watch lists; there would be no American Revolution. No matter how uncomfortable, the right to criticize and question our government leaders gave us our freedoms and we must continue to monitor and fight to keep this right to free speech. “Censorship reflects society’s lack of confidence in itself. It is a hallmark of an authoritarian regime,” Potter Stewart

December 15, 2010 by admin Civil Rights Freedom Stupid People

wikisuccess……

I have been stunned by the number of times I have asked friends and family about Wikileaks and their opinion last week and they knew nothing. Although Wikileaks was splashed all over the headlines, sadly it appears Cybermonday is far more important to most Americans. Last week the talk show personalities and government officials were quick to offer their condemnations, calling the actions of Wikileaks treasonous and criminal. Anytime the media, government, and the entire political spectrum agree it is worth considering the contrarian position. Personally, I have a strong contradictory opinion in support of Wikileaks and want to make a case for my opinion.

I have watched Wikileaks evolve over the last several years as a safe haven for whistleblower journalism. Julian Assange is an Australian born hacker who ran a software company and is the public persona of Wikileaks. The catalyst for the web site was capturing internet traffic in China, observations and secret emails by the Chinese government several years ago shared by dissidents who required extreme protection for fear of ultimate retaliation by the Chinese. With the protections of Swedish law regarding anonymity to sources of the Press, secure servers around the world, and safe drop boxes for information Wikileaks became the ultimate whistleblower web site. Not only has the site shared government secrets, but individuals have posted corporate details leading to arrests.

In April 2010, after funding and server problems, Assange splashed Wikileaks across the front pages of the news worldwide with the release of secret documents describing U.S. killings of civilians in Iraq in 2007. In July 2010 Wikileaks released the “Afghan War Diaries” and Assange was instantly condemned by both the press and government for recklessly putting troops in harm’s way through the document release. However, the Afghanistan documents brought to light government cover-ups regarding friendly fire and civilian casualties. At the time, I researched this release wondering about the legality and learned of a similar, earth shattering release of government information made by Daniel Ellsberg in 1971, “The Pentagon Papers.” Ellsberg was vindicated by the Supreme Court ruling the Constitution guarantees anonymity, at least in the area of political discourse.
With the release of last week’s documents, now labeled “cablegate”, Assange has become a permanent thorn to the U.S. government. Both sides of the aisle have called his acts treasonous and are seeking his arrest. He is reviled by many and wanted by Interpol, for consensual sex without a condom in Sweden. I argue the headlines are made to discredit Assange and tarnish his public reputation. Sarah Palin has blasted Assange, Clinton accused him of an ‘attack’ on the world, and Senator Lieberman successfully shutdown servers and related Wikileaks documents in the United States.

The documents show embarrassing corruption in the Afghanistan war, orders to spy on delegates to the United Nations by Secretary Clinton, and accusations of mafia like activities by the Russian government. I believe the documents show the true nature of our government, and governments worldwide, an elitist class of buffoons in charge of public policy using their positions of power to promote personal self interests. We all learn in high school we should live our lives as if our actions are to make front page headlines on the New York Times. In this case, with the release of documents dating back 40 years the true opinions and ineptness of our government officials is now public.

Those against the release of Wikileaks argue the documents will result in the loss of life to secretly placed operatives and erode progress of political negotiations, but no one has died as a result of Wikileaks. Cablegate has shed light on African governments stealing billions for personal gain, negotiations by the U.S. with terrorist nations, and acknowledgment of civilian loss of life in our wars. I am shocked the media is not more supportive of Wikileaks and can only assume the embarrassment of being “scooped” by one outside their ranks, similar to Matt Drudge during the Clinton years, has alienated support.

I argue government must be held to the highest standard, one that operates with ultimate transparency. Without the spotlight of transparency the citizens are subject to corruption, theft of public funds in the treasury, disregard of the law, and in some cases death. Assange promises the next release will reveal details of a large bank institution’s handling of the financial crisis. I believe public opinion and the media anchors will offer applause when Wikileaks offers the same insights inside a private corporation and comments similar to those made by our government leaders inside a board room would make the late night talk show monologues rife with jokes, not condemnation. I want my government held accountable and operating with the highest integrity and moral fortitude, I applaud Assange and his courageousness. History will reflect his actions as critical to the safety of citizens worldwide and changing the way government operates.

As I write this column, Saturday December 4th, 2010, the Wikileaks.org web site I visited multiple times earlier in the week is no longer accessible. Internet purists are working on new technologies to bypass government interventions and maintain ultimate freedom of information on the web. I do not live in China, I do not want censorship, and I do not want the tyranny of a government hiding from its own illegal acts.

December 9, 2010 by admin Big Government Civil Rights Controversy Mainstream Media Stupid People

Burn Qurans

I am disappointed this afternoon, Thursday the 9th of September, after reading reports that Pastor Terry Jones has announced his church will not burn the Quran on Saturday, September 11th, the ninth anniversary of the day America was attacked by Muslim extremists. Last week I wrote in support of the project in New York, building a mosque at Ground Zero. Constitutionally the right to build the Mosque is guaranteed; however distasteful. Similarly, Pastor Jones’ right to burn the Quran is guaranteed; again, however distasteful. I would hope our military could defend itself, but that appears questionable based on public comments.

What truly concerns me is the world’s willingness to cow tow to the Muslim extremists and threats. Are we to believe the world’s largest superpower, the USA, and our western allies cannot defend citizens against threats from religious zealots who have become a political movement set on killing all who disagree with them? President Kennedy’s Secretary of State, Dean Rusk, said “appeasing the aggressor only makes him more aggressive.” Repeatedly, this political movement, called Islam, has attacked innocent civilians worldwide: December 1992 in Yemen, 1993 WTC in New York, 1998 Kenya and Tanzania US Embassies killing 200 and injuring 5000, October 2000 USS Cole, 2000 Rizal Day Bombings in the Philippines, WTC 9/11/2001, 2007 Algiers Bombing, 2008 Danish Embassy, and the 2009 Little Rock Arkansas Recruitment building. Additionally, although not tied directly to Al-Qaeda, the Ft. Hood Massacre, failed 2009 Northwest Airlines bombing, and the failed Times Square bombing were also in “the name of Allah.”

Our President offers apologies to the nations of the world that oppress their mothers, daughters, and wives. The same nations with state established religion, censorship, and political oppression. He finds reasons to coddle our enemies, fails to retaliate, and explains we will withdraw troops to satisfy the demands of the petroleum-based kingdoms harboring the Jihadists who hate us. Our enemy issues “fatwa” for denigrating their political idols and writings, Muhammad, Allah and the Quran. Just check with Solomon Rushdie and the creators of South Park. Pastor Jones is considered by many a red-neck racist extremist; maybe he is a guy with the cojones to stand up to our enemy. Most saddening is General Patreaus’ concern for troop safety which makes me wonder who is winning the war. It appears 2,983 died on 9/11/2001 in vain and there can only be one conclusion: we must all live in fear of Islam.

September 15, 2010 by admin Civil Rights Controversy Freedom Muslim Obama Terrorists

Obama is Right

Obama is Right

This is probably the most concerning column I have written, not because I agree with the President but because the issue is sensitive, to both sides. Currently, whether to build Park51 (a.k.a. Ground Zero Mosque) is driving passionate public debates. Hesitantly, President Obama voiced his opinion two weeks ago when he said the right to build the project was constitutionally protected. The following day he made further comments stating while constitutionally protected, it may be in bad taste. I must agree with both of his comments. While it may be in bad taste, I do not believe it is a community center designed to protect, or possibly sympathize to Islamic terrorists as has been asserted by some in the media. Ultimately, the court of public opinion will either empower the developers and those funding the project, or send them packing.

I am disturbed by talk radio pundits flummoxing methods. Other than to inflame an ill-informed public there is no other purpose for the front-page debate. The fallacy of the current argument comes from the presumption if terrorists are Muslim then all Muslims are terrorists. I take issue because living in the south, as a white male; I am stereotyped as a racist redneck by the argument racist rednecks are southern white males. Similarly, a German born in the 1920’s is not automatically a Nazi. What has been lost in the argument propelled center stage is the right to build a place of worship, as protected by the First Amendment of the Constitution. The same people who herald the constitution in arguments against healthcare, bailouts, and social programs are quick to stomp the same document when it does not meet their needs.

There are many aspects of the Constitution which may not conveniently fit our desires and likes. However, if we remain consistent in our application, trusting the truths set forth by the founding fathers we will not go wrong. In the case of Park51, it is clear there is no constitutional violation to build. The decision to build is purely local and is governed by the zoning laws, planning commissions, and local electorate. Does it feel good to support building the project? No, but the more important issue at hand is support of the Constitution in the face of our enemies, asserting what separates our country from those who attack us in the name of God.

September 12, 2010 by admin Civil Rights Controversy Freedom Mainstream Media Muslim Terrorists

Liberty – Part I

I am writing this week’s column on Independence Day, aka the 4th of July. I am in Washington, D.C. with my wife and children, having traveled here in our RV to show them our nation’s capital and watch the fireworks from the National Mall tonight. Our first stop yesterday, was the most important highlight of the trip to me, a visit to the National Archives Museum. I wanted to share with my children the three most important documents in the world, “The Freedom Charters”, or the Declaration of Independence, The Constitution, and The Bill of Rights.

Like no other nation in history, our founding fathers saw a need to create a new form of government, one free from tyranny. Men like Thomas Paine, “Common Sense”, were opening the publics’ eyes by creating a tool for debate to separate from a Monarchy and move to Republicanism. On July 4th, 1776 fifty-six (56) men penned their signatures to this “experiment” and risked their lives to give to future generations the “Pursuit of Life, Liberty, and Happiness.” These mean, were young, idealistic, and working the land to survive and provide for their families.

Many today claim the writings and thoughts of these men are outdated and need to change with time. However, I would make another assertion; the simplicity of the singe handwritten page of the Declaration of Independence, or the four handwritten pages of the Constitution framed a government that was meant to first trust its people. As I walk around Washington, DC I now see a government that disdains its people, trusts itself, and honors itself. Our country is no longer our country, but one that belongs to a small group of elitists. This is obvious by the monuments, the size of buildings, security barriers along streets, thousands of police officers, and helicopters overflying. Ronald Reagan said, “Man is not free unless government is limited…As government expands, liberty contracts.”

Since our last Independence Day our country has changed dramatically, a huge socialist move has taken place under the guise of “Change and Hope.” Throughout history leaders have offered to care for their citizens, provide for them, but ultimately those experiments of evolved to dictatorships with tyrannical consequences: Mao, Hitler, Mussolini, Castro, and Stalin for example. Walking through Washington, I am proud to be an American, but like the bumper sticker on my RV says, “I love my Country…but fear my Government.”

July 12, 2010 by admin Big Government Civil Rights Freedom Stupid People

Protected Speech

I sit in the middle on this page with an objective to raise points of interest to anyone, regardless of political view. Writing on this page brings scrutiny to my opinions and exposes myself to debate and argument. I have learned it takes courage to stand in front of the crowd for what I believe, and I always work to ensure there are no personal attacks in my writing, but often I see columnists and bloggers using personal attacks in an effort to drive home their point. Fueling these attacks is the veil of anonymity; no longer signing a letter or a blog response with your name and address creating an inflammatory environment. Furthermore, I do not believe the First Amendment was intended to protect anonymous speech, but the Supreme Court has taken a different view.

I absolutely believe our democracy thrives on protected speech; it differentiates us from the oppression found around the world when ideas and opinions are given. Appropriately, libel and slander laws are also in place to prevent abuse of protected speech.

A few recent examples of my concern over whether anonymous speech is protected are important as I feel the cowardice of anonymity fuels defamatory personal attacks. For example, Tiger Woods is fighting in the Court of public opinion. Legitimate writers are identifiable and must “source” their comments. Sadly though, I have read news articles on various web sites where anonymous bloggers attack Tiger’s character and make crude comments about him personally. These anonymous people don’t know him and have no basis for those comments, but behind the veil of anonymity these people weakly assert defamatory opinions.

Similarly, people either love or hate Sarah Palin. As a country we are as divided on feelings about her as we are on college football in Florida. We all know the story of Palin and her rise to the highest position of leadership in Alaska, but yet people attack her personally. Opinions focus not on Palin’s accomplishments as a politician, but instead follow David Letterman’s method of crude, personal attacks. A quick look at the Huffington Post article regarding the Newsweek cover featuring Palin’s “legs” showed over 1,000 commentators and I must wonder how the tone of those comments would change had real names and addresses been used.

Personally, I feel the problem with the protection of anonymous speech is it allows for cowardice and unfounded statements. But, the Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled anonymous speech is protected. The much cited 1995 Supreme Court ruling in McIntyre vs. Ohio Elections Commission reads: “Protections for anonymous speech are vital to democratic discourse. Allowing dissenters to shield their identities frees them to express critical, minority views . . . Anonymity is a shield from the tyranny of the majority. . . . It thus exemplifies the purpose behind the Bill of Rights, and of the First Amendment in particular: to protect unpopular individuals from retaliation . . . at the hand of an intolerant society.”

Although protected, sadly anonymous speech typically leaves the door open to defamation and the burden to prove otherwise is on the victim. Thus, this empowers questionable publications and writings and can sway public opinion on unfounded claims. I will continue to sign my name and always write with the understanding that I stand by my opinions and am not ashamed to hide behind anonymity. I encourage you to consider what you want to say and whether it is anonymity or your beliefs that give you the strength to share your opinion.

December 31, 2009 by admin Civil Rights