They're coming to get me, hee hee, ha ha...

No, really, they are.

I'm serious.

You think I'm joking?

Not.

You have to read this one to believe it...

Democrat Proposes Jail Time for 'Hostile' Bloggers
We know that the government is becoming more and more audacious in its attempts to control our lives and regulate our speech and whatever it thinks we're thinking (see the newest iteration of the federal Hate Crimes law), so a new story from Wired should come as no surprise. Looks like Democratic Rep. Linda Sanchez, Calif., is ready to throw mean-old bloggers in the hoosegow.
http://townhall.com/blog/g/b719c095-9ae8-4eb4-a9f7-9e3911a527db

Prison Awaiting Hostile Bloggers
Proposed congressional legislation would demand up to two years in prison for those whose electronic speech is meant to “coerce, intimidate, harass, or cause substantial emotional distress to a person.”
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/05/prison-awaiting-hostile-bloggers/

As a friend of mine commented, who defines hostile?

One person's hostile is another person's humor is another person's stupid.

Are the Democrats going to define hostile? lawyers? politicians? ministers? atheists? environmentalists? the military? gun owners? your mother?

Lest you think that this doesn't pertain to you, think again. The bill (HR 1966) doesn't just pick on bloggers. Oh no, it's fair in its unfairness. It includes email, telephones, instant messaging, text messages and website. Yep, if you are hostile (however someone might define it) via any device using electronic means, you could be jailed for up to two, count 'em, two years.

Can you imagine going to jail for two years and not having access to your cell phone, computer or telephone? Talk about hostile.

If you "coerce, intimidate, harass, or cause substantial emotional distress to a person”, per the bill, off you go to the pokey.

What is it with Democrats and free speech? What happened to all the peace, love and freedom loving types from the 60s and 70s? Did they take sour pills? Free speech has come to mean speech that I like and can agree with wholeheartedly. I can yell, but you can't. I can tear you down but you can't reciprocate.

Remember "sticks and stones can break my bones but words can never harm me"? Seems that we've become so sensitive and wimpy that words are worse than sticks or stones.

What's next? Thought crimes? Oh, wait, we may already be there. I haven't gotten into the issue much, but there are some who wonder why beating up a person of another race or sexual preference is worse than beating up someone who's of the same race or sexual persuasion.

Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and friends want to shut down talk radio because they don't like what's being said. Now a fellow Democrat wants to go after bloggers. Just how long do you think it'll be before we're living in some Orwellian nightmare world once we start down the road Sanchez and her ilk are trying to shove us?

I don't like hate-speech, harassment, nastiness any more than the next person. However, I defy anyone to find a definition that the majority of us can agree upon. I also think we're getting really, really stupid with this stuff.

Oh man, I think that comment might have been somewhat hostile. Cuff me, I'm a cyberbully.

Here's part of the bill:

SEC. 3. CYBERBULLYING.
(a) In General- Chapter 41 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:`Sec. 881. Cyberbullying
`(a) Whoever transmits in interstate or foreign commerce any communication, with the intent to coerce, intimidate, harass, or cause substantial emotional distress to a person, using electronic means to support severe, repeated, and hostile behavior, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.`(b) As used in this section--
`(1) the term `communication' means the electronic transmission, between or among points specified by the user, of information of the user's choosing, without change in the form or content of the information as sent and received; and`
(2) the term `electronic means' means any equipment dependent on electrical power to access an information service, including email, instant messaging, blogs, websites, telephones, and text messages.'

Reid: Paying Taxes is Voluntary

I thought this video was comedy at first because they weren't showing the interviewer and Harry Reid together. It had to be a spoof it was so ridiculous.

Harry Reid, Senate Majority Leader, asserts that we have a voluntary tax system because we can claim exemptions.

Um, last time I checked, if we don't pay, we go to jail. We have no say over what is done with our taxes (aside from trying to elect the right people... I won't tell you what I think of that one in this post :-).

Our system is better than the European system, per Reid, because there the employer takes out all the taxes and here we get to fill out tons of forms, pay tax accountants, hassle with the IRS, get fined if we don't report correctly or we're late... OK, yes, I admit, I embellished his comments on that last bit... take me to jail, fine me... oh, wait, I was confused, that's what happens when you have tax problems in our voluntary system, not what happens when you exaggerate what a politician said... at the moment. Given what's going on in Washington, that could change at any minute.




Hat tip to Bruce P. Majors on Facebook for bringing this video to may attention.