Democrats Oppose Freedom of Speech   

Congress has no constitutional authority to be calling for the censorship of speech or expression it considers misinformation or disinformation.

The President of the United States has no mandate to be calling for the censorship of speech or expression he or she has labeled misinformation or disinformation.

No federal department, agency, bureau, association, committee, or conference has business calling for the censorship of speech or expression they have tagged as misinformation or disinformation.

The federal government of the United States has no jurisdiction whatsoever to be deciding for the public what is fact or fiction. This level of intrusiveness, if allowed to fester and spread like a grotesque infection, is a prelude to an increasingly oppressive society.

The First Amendment of the United States Constitution protects the right to freedom of religion and freedom of expression from government interference. It prohibits any laws that establish a national religion, impede the free exercise of religion, abridge the freedom of speech, infringe upon the freedom of the press, interfere with the right to peaceably assemble, or prohibit citizens from petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances. It was adopted into the Bill of Rights in 1791.[1] 

The First Amendment

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.

The phrase “freedom of speech”, until recently, was self-explanatory. It meant individuals, or a community could publicly express opinions and ideas without fear of censorship, retaliation, persecution, or prosecution. Americans used to accept opinions they deeply disagreed with as the right of someone else to be wrong. Argument and debate were followed with an agreement to disagree. Contentious subject matter could be rehashed over and over again, with neither side gaining or giving an inch. We held that the right to speak freely was far more important than convincing others that we were right. Silencing opposing views we knew was not the American way. Communists and dictatorships silence people. Americans do not! That was until recently.  

The courts have helped define what is free speech and what crosses the free speech line within a civil society. Here are some cases to better understand how the law has framed what is protected or free speech, and what is not.[2]

Freedom of speech includes the right:

• Not to speak (specifically, the right not to salute the flag).
  West Virginia Board of Education v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624 (1943).
• Of students to wear black armbands to school to protest a war (“Students do not shed their constitutional rights at the schoolhouse gate.”).
  Tinker v. Des Moines, 393 U.S. 503 (1969).
• To use certain offensive words and phrases to convey political messages.
  Cohen v. California, 403 U.S. 15 (1971).
• To contribute money (under certain circumstances) to political campaigns.
  Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1 (1976).
• To advertise commercial products and professional services (with some restrictions).
  Virginia Board of Pharmacy v. Virginia Consumer Council, 425 U.S. 748 (1976); Bates v. State Bar of Arizona, 433 U.S. 350 (1977).
• To engage in symbolic speech, (e.g., burning the flag in protest).
  Texas v. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397 (1989); United States v. Eichman, 496 U.S. 310 (1990).

 Freedom of speech does not include the right:

• To incite imminent lawless action.
  Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969).
• To make or distribute obscene materials.
  Roth v. United States, 354 U.S. 476 (1957).
• To burn draft cards as an anti-war protest.
  United States v. O’Brien, 391 U.S. 367 (1968).
• To permit students to print articles in a school newspaper over the objections of the school administration. 
  Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier, 484 U.S. 260 (1988).
• Of students to make an obscene speech at a school-sponsored event.
  Bethel School District #43 v. Fraser, 478 U.S. 675 (1986).
• Of students to advocate illegal drug use at a school-sponsored event.
  Morse v. Frederick, __ U.S. __ (2007).

Their Relentless Pursuit of Infringement

Whether you call them liberals, socialists, communists, authoritarians, or just plain Democrats, the efforts by the left to infringe upon free speech have never been more intense. One of the greatest examples of the Democrats going full Orwellian on free speech was the Biden Administration’s short lived Disinformation Governance Board (DGB).

An advisory board of the Department of Homeland Security, the Disinformation Governance Board was announced on April 27, 2022. The mission of the DGB advisory board was to provide guidance to DHS agencies on how best to combat misinformation, malinformation, and disinformation that threatened the security of the United States.

Malinformation is the truth used to inflict harm on a person, organization or country.

Misinformation is false or inaccurate information such as getting the facts wrong.

Disinformation is false information which is deliberately intended to mislead such as intentionally misstating the facts.

The irony of the federal government deciding what is malinformation, misinformation, and disinformation is rich. It incubates and percolates half truths and lies as standard operating procedure. And to have one of our nation’s greatest recorded liars at the helm, Joseph Robinette Biden Jr., while supposedly navigating us to the shining shores of purity and truth is itself misinformation, malinformation, and disinformation. It was a psyops if you ask me. A test to see if America had marinated in liberalism long enough to finally put an end to this experiment with liberty and self-governance.

Fortunately, the backlash was immediate and fierce. Freedom of thought and expression was not ready to surrender. The Disinformation Governance Board was dubbed the Ministry of Truth from George Orwell’s dystopian novel 1984. The head of the DGB, Nina Jankowicz, was lambasted and resigned amid public backlash. On May 18, 2022 the board and it’s working groups were suspended pending further review. Less than four months after its formation, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas disbanded the Disinformation Governance Board on August 24, 2022.

Psycho Pseudo Psychiatry

According to the American Psychological Association (APA), the spread of misinformation and disinformation has affected our ability to improve public health, address climate change, maintain a stable democracy, and more. By providing valuable insight into how and why we are likely to believe misinformation and disinformation, psychological science can inform how we protect ourselves against its ill effects.[3]

The pungent liberalism that drips from this 146,000-member association of researchers, educators, clinicians, consultants, and students has saturated the minds of policymaking bureaucrats and liberal lawmakers alike. These types of liberal groups, communities, boards, associations, and thinktanks have warped reality so severely that today we argue whether teenagers should be allowed to mutilate or remove healthy body parts because they are uncomfortable in their own skin. We have a Supreme Court Justice who could not define what a woman is because as she said, “I’m not a biologist”. We have men crushing records in women’s sports while groups like the APA say it’s only fair to let the mythical transwoman (there is no such thing) compete in women’s sports. Ask why that’s fair and you be labeled all types of insane things. If you work in academia, you’ll likely lose your job or be run off of campus.

There are thousands of these liberal groups around the country. The progressivism they churn out is poison to virtue. The thing about progressivism is it must always be progressing or else it dies. Within twenty years, liberals will be thrusting pedophilia and bestiality upon society as new rights for the born this way mob. Unless stopped, there is no telling what sin and debauchery they will be parading on Main Street come June 2043.

These are the types of people who want to decide for you what is malinformation, misinformation, and disinformation. Some of the most dishonest, biased, disgusting people in the country want to censor common religious values and the confessions of conviction by the faithful. None of these haters of free speech are tolerant or respectful of views that run contrary to their own. Oddly, these Democrats want complete freedom to spew their filthy and hateful rhetoric while they scream and disrupt a conservative speaker for expressing his or her opinions. In the extreme COMA Democrat’s warped mind, being a Communist Oppressing Middle America by any means necessary, including threats and violence, is absolutely justified. This selfish and childish response to anything these liberals find offensive, basically anything grounded in decency, is the result of fifty years or more of liberalism being pumped into American society.  

Pushing for the liberal deep state to become the nation’s editor, Joe Biden, the most dishonest and devious President in the history of the United States has said:

“There is truth and there are lies. Lies told for power and for profit. And each of us has a duty and responsibility, as citizens, as Americans, and especially as leaders – leaders who have pledged to honor our Constitution and protect our nation — to defend the truth and to defeat the lies.”

Under no circumstances should Americans who still cherish the liberties and freedoms guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution tolerate the power grab underway by the federal government to censor speech. The Democrats claim they must act to save our democracy by using totalitarian enactments. Don’t believe them. They’re spreading malinformation, misinformation, and disinformation.

---

[1] LII Legal Information Institute, First Amendment, https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/first_amendment , (accessed 12/8/23)

[2] What does free speech mean?, United States Courts, https://www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-courts/educational-resources/about-educational-outreach/activity-resources/what-does (accessed 12/10/23)

[3] American Psychological Association, Misinformation and Disinformation, https://www.apa.org/topics/journalism-facts/misinformation-disinformation