SHARE

If I knew how to Photoshop a rifle target on U.S. Rep. Jim Clyburn’s face, I’d have done it …

It’s not that I want anybody to bust a cap in his tired old Cosby wardrobe raidin’ ass, I just know that “controversial” imagery like that would capably reinforce this website’s commitment to the First Amendment at a time when Clyburn and his socialist allies in Washington D.C. seem intent on tramping all over it.

As part of the leftist overreaching that has flowed from Saturday’s tragic shooting spree in Tucson, Arizona – which left six people dead and fourteen people (including U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords) wounded – Clyburn recently told the Charleston Post and Courier that it’s time for America to “rethink the parameters of free speech.”

Really?

According to the article, Clyburn “wants standards put in place to guarantee balanced media coverage” and “a reinstatement of the Fairness Doctrine, in addition to calling on elected officials and media pundits to use ‘better judgment.'”

So let’s get this straight … a mentally-disturbed man with no discernible ideology (or connection to reality) goes off the deep end and kills a bunch of people – and Clyburn’s remedy to that is to curtail our First Amendment rights and put the government in charge of the public discourse?

Talk about overkill … of course Clyburn’s rhetoric isn’t really about the Tucson massacre. Nor is it about guns, the alleged gunman or what may have caused him to flip out and murder all those people. No … this is all about silencing dissent. More specifically, it is a naked attempt by Clyburn and his ideological allies to level the playing field in the marketplace of ideas after their socialist vision for this country was flat-out rebuked by the American people at the polls last November.

It won’t work …

“The American people will not be silenced and intimidated by this pretense that somehow their political rhetoric caused the tragedy in Arizona,” writes Bill Wilson, President of Americans for Limited Government. “Now, more than ever, it is time to voice legitimate objections against a government that turns every tragedy into an opportunity to seize power.”

Exactly … this anti-free speech crusade isn’t about Jared Lee Loughner, it’s about forcing limited government advocates to “stand down” at the very moment in our nation’s history when their contribution to the public debate is needed most of all.

It’s also about getting people like me (and blogs like FITS) to sit down and shut up at the very moment when we’ve started giving the big government apologists in the mainstream media a run for their money.

So .. am I going to “stand down?” Will FITS “shut up?” Am I going to “tone down” my rhetoric?

Fuck no.

And fuck Clyburn if he thinks for one second that his threats are going to intimidate me from speaking my mind. He can kiss my black ass …

Obviously, Clyburn’s contempt for the U.S. Constitution is nothing new. For example, his rationalization for voting in favor of U.S. President Barack Obama’s unconstitutional socialized medicine law was to say that “there’s nothing in the Constitution that says the federal government has anything to do with most of the stuff we do.”

Amazing, huh?

His contempt for the taxpayers is also legendary … like the time he accidentally sent government pork to the wrong district or fell asleep during a town hall meeting.

Fortunately, there is something in the U.S. Constitution that prevents Clyburn from gagging the voices of American citizens who feel compelled to disagree with him regarding the direction their country is taking.

It’s called the First Amendment … and as much as Clyburn clearly detests the freedoms that it provides, it’s not going anywhere.

“The only thing more shameful than the tragedy in Arizona right now is the reaction of congressional Democrats who are using the attempted assassination of a colleague for the most base of political purposes,” the editorial board of The Boston Herald wrote on Tuesday morning. “And the real victim here – if they have their way – will be the free speech rights of all Americans.”

“Frankly we’d rather take our chances with a crazed gunman than with crazed politicians,” the editorial concludes.

So would we … especially if one of those politicians is Jim Clyburn.

***