Cruz Punches Back at Schumer for Child Porn Comment

By Kim D.  

Love him or hate him, one thing is for certain: Ted Cruz doesn't let much go without setting the record straight.  This past Tuesday, Republican Texas Sen. Ted Cruz hit back at what he saw as an unfair accusation from Democratic New York Sen. Chuck Schumer that Cruz would allow child pornography on the grounds that it qualifies as free speech, in a Senate Judiciary hearing.

Cruz has been vocal on the dangers of altering the First Amendment. Schumer's proposal to restrict free speech is in regard to broad campaign finance reform, but, as Cruz points out, once such a precedent has been set it opens the door to further restrictions on First Amendment liberties granted by the Bill of Rights. 

Cruz also went on to debunk three canards he identified as being problematic with the Democrats proposal.

1. This is all about nefarious billionaires [insert a Harry Reid Koch rant here]. Cruz, the excellent lawyer that he is, argues with evidence from non-partisan OpenSecrets.org that the top 16 donors to campaigns in the last 25 years have supported Democratic candidates 100%. By the way, the Koch Brothers are ranked 59th on the top political donor list.
2. Money is not speech. Again Cruz points out that speech has always had a cost from printing the Federalist Papers to mass printing yard signs to distribute for a political campaign to creating a website for campaigning or even blogging purposes.
3. Corporations have no rights. Cruz points out the obvious - the NY Times and the NAACP are corporations just like Koch Industries. Restricting speech will not be selective. 

So, basically why are liberals so upset with the Koch Brothers? Liberals own Hollywood and major media outlets. As Cruz points out, they have the top donors. What are they worried about? The truth may lie in failed progressive ideology and current enacted policy. Liberals have to shut down dissent and suppress support for opposite political beliefs because the liberal/progressive message cannot truly win in a free society [insert more brainwashing here].

Ruh roh! Our ability to mock pols via Photoshopping is in danger! BONUS: Photoshopped pics mocking pols

By Correctamundo 


Rep Earnest Smith (D-Augusta) is an angry black man. And as any good politician would do when something upsets them, they immediately attack the Constitution or the Bill of Rights.

A Georgia state lawmaker with an unconventional grasp of the First Amendment is backing a bill that would make lewd photoshopping a crime punishable by a $1,000 fine.Rep. Earnest Smith pointed, as proof of the problem, to a picture of his head that was recently edited onto a pornstar’s body. That image was created by a blogger who used the image to mock Smith. 

The Augusta-based legislator said he was not worried the bill would step on First Amendment rights.

“Everyone has a right to privacy,” he told FoxNews.com. “No one has a right to make fun of anyone. It’s not a First Amendment right.”

Whoa, Nellie (apologies to my mother-in-law for using her name in vain).  No one has a right to make fun of anyone - will this include the MSM lapdogs like Chrissy Matthews, Toure, Ed Schultz, and anyone that works for ABC, NBC, CBS, MSNBC, & CNN? Where exactly does it say that in the Bill of Rights, Earnest?  

The lawmaker did not provide any specifics of the legislation when contacted by FoxNews.com. After being pressed to provide details, he said, “At this juncture, I am not at liberty to share anything with you. I don’t have to. If and when this bill passes we can revisit the issue and if I choose to give you details at that time I will, but until then I don’t have to tell you anything.” 

When asked if he thought his bill would target parodies -- which are protected by the First Amendment -- he said it didn’t matter.

“They (parody creators) live for something like this,” Smith said. “They are vulgar. This is about being vulgar. We’re becoming a nation of vulgar people.”

Not everyone shares Smith’s sentiments.

“He’s the conductor of his own crazy train,” one lawmaker told FoxNews.com.

This all sounds too familiar, not having to tell us what's in a bill until it's passed.  Where have I heard that before?  Oh yeah.....

By making the statement that 'it doesn't matter' if something is protected already in the 1st Amendment, you're showing your true agenda which isn't surprising - it's also Hillary's latest battle cry. The sticky part here is that the MSM are all about the 1st Amendment - freedom of the press. And they're not going to want to give up their bread and butter because someone got their feelings hurt.

So until this issue is put to rest, I'm going to keep Photoshopping to express myself. Really, when you think about it, Photoshopping pics about pols is just putting into a picture what the idiot(s) said, believe, or did as described in print.  If you want to stop the hurt feelings, then talk to the dimwitted pols that don't know how to keep their mouths shut.

For your further entertainment and until they come and seize my Photoshop program from my cold, dead hands, here's some past hurt feelings that I've caused.