In liberal land, also known as Los Angeles, it should be no shock that the City Council wants to repeal the First Amendment. After all, they are a bunch of liberal hacks and they cannot stand the idea that someone disagrees with them. The LA city council would do so well in the kind of socialist dictatorship they seem to prefer.
What has happened now?
From Los Angeles CBS:
City Council members took a step closer on Wednesday to becoming the first in the nation to adopt a resolution condemning certain types of speech on public airwaves.
Councilmember Jan Perry introduced legislation that would call upon media companies to ensure “on-air hosts do not use and promote racist and sexist slurs” on radio and other broadcasts.
Members of Black Media Alliance, National Hispanic Media Coalition, Korean-American Bar Association, American Indians in Film and Television were on hand to voice their support for the proposal.
The resolution — which was also supported by Councilmember Bernard Parks and Council President Herb Wesson — called attention to the recent uproar over comments by KFI 640 AM talk show hosts John Kobylt and Ken Chiampou.
Kobylt and Chiampou were suspended after they called the late pop singer Whitney Houston a “crack ho” three days after her death in February.
The proposal cites a “long history of racially offensive comments as well as deplorable sexist remarks, particularly towards women and Black, Latino, and Asian communities” at KFI 640 and calls for parent company Clear Channel Communications to hire a more diverse workforce to offset the trend.
I have one brief message for the Los Angeles city council and my message is protected by the First Amendment.
The Whitney Houston incident is simply a pretext. They do not want diversity. In fact, they want just the opposite. They want conservatives silenced.
The Los Angeles city council’s idea of deplorable comments is conservative speech. They do not like people pointing out that socialism sucks.
I have a better idea. Instead of a resolution repealing the First Amendment, why don’t you clowns on the LA city council resign? You are not public servants. You are a disgrace. You are a disgrace to America.
Since one third of LA students drop out, perhaps you Bozos could join them in a remedial civics class that would start with an explanation of the First Amendment and freedom of speech.
In the meanwhile, hopefully Clear Channel will tell the LA city council to go to hell and how to get there.
Judson,. I finally agree with you on something.
Ahh, It's good to be a white male. EVERY new law is pointed at you. I'm pretty much bottom of the barrel, after all I am of German decent, therefore I am a nazi. I am also white, so I once owned, and also am blamed for slavery. I just wonder...Why werent the gays on hand to voice their support the proposal? Whimps
Everyone obviously knows what California is. Would you expect anything else? Try taking my rights in Michigan!(Speech and arms). It aint gonna happen. Californians are too weak. Is this a threat? Come and find out socialists!
I'm sure worse has been said about Amy Winehouse, even Britany Spears...much as I abhor her behavior and constant coverage by the MSM. Typical progressive crap. Judson, I have a legal question for you (off topic a bit): How is it not illegal, and tyranny or sedition to belong to the Socialist Party or Communist Party while serving in Congress, or the WH for that matter? Isn't that cause enough for immediate removal? Socialism/communism is in direct opposition to the Constitution.
Disgrace is putting it mildly! Anti-American is more to the point.
Let them be their own country! Since they love "socialism", they should join together with other socialist states to see
how well they support themselves. It would soon become apparent.
oh, does the LA city council take a oath to defend the national constitution....sure it's not the Mexican constitution?
This is what billions of dollars has done to the educational system; it's produced undereducated, dropouts and a literal Bay of Communist Pigs in the Administration and Teaching sectors. This toilette needs to be flushed.
As long as the legislation is specifically stated to be in regard to racist and sexist slurs, it could only be applied in those specific contexts. Is there currently reason to believe it wouldn't be so narrowly tailored?
Also, any other lawyers on here, if we can assume for this question that the wording would be very specifically and narrowly tailored to racist and sexist slurs, wouldn't it actually be a legal "time, place, and manner" restriction, as it would apply the same way to everyone using public airways? As far as I can tell, any private airways would still be able to make any slurs they want, so there wouldn't actually be an issue with the First Amendment. It seems to me that any problems that could arise would be due to a non-specific tailoring of the language so that it could possibly be applied to anything other than racist and sexist slurs, or if it attempted to enforce any requirements on private airways. Is this correct?
Once the Supreme Court made it illegal to yell fire in a theatre, our First Amendment was heading out the door.
L.A. is creating a Ghetto, once a beautiful ,prosperous city, they now, have a Sheriff, who wants to be Friends with Rabid Moslems, instead of arresting them, trust me, Sharia Law, not far behind on this one. The "Hollywood" and Elite, are protected ,by private Police, and can afford to insulate themselves. The rest of the Citizens have read the Liberal newspapers, the T,V. and have bought "the package". If I am Illegal, Black, or a Moslem, or am just too lazy to work, but smart enough, to collect thousands in welfare, then why not, and if all else fails, I can deal in Drugs, and Pornography,as it is socially acceptable. Now, sadly somewhere, in here, are the innocent people trying to work, but if you don't belong to a Union, you can't work. I feel very sad about all of this, because I see the waste, God gave all his beauty to California, and if you don't believe that, drive down the coast. I lived there, not in L.A., but on a hill in a Southern town, for 26 years. Everytime I came down my hill, overlooking the Pacific in the distant, I always said to myself, "God outdid himself when he made California".. I left California, because it just has too many problems, and they get worse,by the day. I know so many people who want to get out of there, but don't have the resources. What a shame, I wanted to live out my days, and die there. There are a lot of very nice people there, but they aren't in L.A. or San Francisco, and they are diminishing.God help the truly good ones, but I fear for them.
California needs to cede from the U.S. and become a state of the corrupt country of Mexico. They would fit in just fine.
Does this 'resolution' have any teeth in it? I think not because it wouldn't withstand even the most mininal, cursory judicial review...this is just more 'Southland' craziness...I hope Clear Channel's leadership tells the LA City Council to pound sand.