Congressional Dems Love Censorship

Democratic members of the House and the Senate have advocated rules that would censor Congressmen and Senators from using certain websites to communicate with constitutents, according to Hot Air.

Even worse, in the Senate, Diane Feinstein proposes that the Senate Rules Committee must approve any intertnet cite that does not end in "Senate.gov":

Under their scheme, the Senate Rules Committee would become the Internet speech police for everyone in the Senate.

It will be up to the committee to “sanction” which websites and forms of communication they deem appropriate.

The Rules Committee thus gets to pick winners and losers among various websites in terms of which are appropriate for use.

(Note to Feinstein: please blacklist my site! It would be an honor.)

The rules would prohibit a Senator from posting on his own campaign web site. It means that a Senator could not write a letter to editor in the online edition of a newspaper. And it means that he or she could not write guest posts -- or even post a comment -- on the millions of citizen-run web sites from which voters increasingly get their news.

This is why many conservatives make the deliberate grammatical error of referring to the opposition as Democrat, rather than Democratic. There is nothing Democratic about censorship.

In the Democrats' topsy-turvy view of the constitution, there is no right to bear arms (though the second amendment, and now the Supreme Court, say otherwise). There is a right to an abortion (though the constitution says no such thing). And now the first amendment right to free speech and press allows Democrats -- the majority -- to silence colleagues who dare express themselves on the internet, unless the site is preapproved by the majority.

The same buffoons who warned us that the Patriot Act heralded the end of our rights were right -- just for the wrong reason.

Nancy Feinstein, who is leading this exercise in black-listing, is also trying to bring back the so-called "Fairness" Doctrine, to require conservative talk radio to give equal time to "progressives" whose own radio stations bombed for lack of listeners.

This is what tyrrany of the majority looks like. As a clear-cut violation of the first amendment, it's the perfect case for the ACLU.