Ira Silverstein Hates the 1st Amendment

Ira Silverstein, an Illinois State Senator, has sponsored a bill that I'm certain everyone in Illinois, not to mention the USA, has been anxiously awaiting.  

I know if I were a lawyer elected to represent my fellow citizens there's a number of bills I'd be happy to sponsor, and I believe even a few of them might make my constituents happy.  Just off the top of my head, how about a bill to:

Destroy the Federal Reserve and demand the US actually print its own money and introduce Social Credit? I'd further ban usury in all its modern forms. 

Severely limit the use of Drones in both the US and foreign lands? How about just making them outright illegal, period?

Or, a bill to reincarnate the Glass Steagall Act and modernize it to severely handcuff the power of the Banking/Wall St.  Conglomerate?

How about finally legalizing all drugs currently labeled 'illegal' and ending this insane War on Drugs? (By the way, how is it that the feds needed to pass a Constitutional Amendment to ban alcohol yet the issue never came up when they decided to ban 'drugs')?

I could go on and on with examples of good legislation.  Maybe Silverstein is in favor of all of the above, but as he only serves in Illinois he's helpless to introduce such bills until the citizens of Illinois finally get their collective asses together and elect him to the US Congress.  A lawyer trained at Loyola, he continues to ply his trade in private practice while at the same time serving in Springfield. So apparently he's not a dummy (I know I'm stretching here, but it's important to give all our leaders the benefit of the doubt).

 I do think, however, Silverstein has very thin skin.

You see, Silverstein has authored a bill to further erode the First Amendment.  A tradition dates back to before the Revolutionary War of printing both signed and unsigned flyers critical of government and/or politicians and distributing them throughout a city or town. There were critiques of the same published in newspapers under assumed names. Even books were and still are authored using a pseudonym.  

But what apparently has Silverstein all worked up are anonymous comments left on websites and blogs.  These he's eager to OUTLAW.  Yes, I hear you asking now: "What?? The good Mr. Silverstein is a lawyer AND an elected senator!  He's taken an oath and, being a lawyer, he surely understands the US Constitution is sacrosanct and not to be abridged!  You're pulling our legs again, Patrick!"  Ah, ye Americans of little faith... I'm sure Silverstein has nothing but the utmost of respect for the Constitution.  Don't ALL politicians?? So we know it isn't simple disrespect.  No, I think it is safe to assume Silverstein has been perusing the WWW and has found it to be not yet Settled. Silverstein has come across anonymous posts that are critical of his ability to represent his district.  He's even likely stumbled on posts critical of his abilities to practice law! Likely a few even penned by drunks or insane folks. That's unacceptable and no politician should have to spend sleepless nights searching the internet for anonymous comments. So what if the Constitution doesn't provide for limits on speech?? As Georgie the Junior Bush said: "The Constitution is just a God damned piece of paper", and that paper shouldn't therefore allow unsigned commenters to cause Silverstein's panties to get all in a twist.  

So Silverstein's plan of action works like this: all websites (and bloggers) will have to, before they accept any comments, first require the potential commenter provide their full legal name and IP addresses. Then they must provide their home address.  Once all 3 are confirmed (I guess Silverstein wants a record of addresses so he can drive by commenter's residences at night and honk his horn) then the webmaster or blogger can, after calling Silverstein directly and asking for approval, post the comment.  Oh right, that last part about Silverstein's direct approval I made up. And I probably shouldn't do that because if he's reads this he might think it too is a good idea. 

There's really not enough attention being paid to all the anonymous Americans today. What with most Americans carrying their own Personal Identification and Location Device (otherwise known as a cell phone) and satellite mapping of every home and now drones filling the sky this year looking down on us to save us from the terrorists, I too agree that anonymous comments on the internet are the single greatest horror we face as a people.  It pleases the heart to know there are still a few quality minds serving as politicians.  I only hope that the Machine in Illinois quickly moves Silverstein on up so he can serve the entire nation in DC, not just the supremely lucky folks of Illinois. We need more of these vibrant minded folks in positions of great power. 

No, actually I kid. How can one who practices law find these words too terribly obtuse to comprehend: "

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

My dearest Ira, all blogs and commercial and non-commercial language on these here internets are either 'speech' or 'press'.  This blog, for instance, is both - in my most humble of opinions... my speech is translated by me to print which is then translated by my amazing computer to pixels and out pops 'news'! Yes, more modern than Ben Franklin's printing press but really not much different... in fact, as far as the Constitution is concerned, news, press and speech are interchangeable, Ira.

  Hell, now lawyers such as yourself have decreed corporations have full rights to free speech and in your collective brilliance  determined that millions in bribes I mean donations, paid by corporations to politicians equates 'speech'.  So, let me see... a guy writing an anonymous comment on a blog saying: 'That Ira Silverstein sure is a dumbass, isn't he?' doesn't meet all those specific requirements defined above in the 1st Amendment, and therefore the author must pass a series of steps YOU created before his comment can be published.  But Monsanto donating money to 'grease the wheels' of legislators who sit on committees that draft rules and regulations and write bills that may be harmful or helpful to Monsanto's business... that's entirely Kosher and guaranteed by the first Amendment.  Hmmmmmm. 

 I don't know.... when I began typing my speech onto my computer and magically turning my voiced words into pixels and assuming both were guaranteed by our Constitution,  I had initially assumed you, Ira were a smart guy, what with being a lawyer and a politician.  Now, however, my opinion has changed.

Ira Silverstein, you're a shithead.  And, you have my name.  Good thing I live too far away for you to drive by and egg and TP my house (you don't get out to the NW too often, do you Ira?  If you have family out here, let me know. I may re-edit this post).


(Ira's on the left)

For what it's worth, in researching this article it appears Ira is pissed off about the 2nd amendment as well.  It would be more simple Ira, rather than bitching and moaning about this and that, if you just re-write the Constitution.  From top to bottom. Then publish it on the internet for all to see.  

We'll give you our opinion of your efforts in the comment section you'll graciously provide.  But here's the deal: I want YOU to make your IP Address AND your HOME ADDRESS available for all to see.  That way I'll know you are serious about everyone else making their IP addresses and home addresses available for government tools like YOU to see.  That's fair, sort of like the 14th Amendment's 'Equal Protection' clause.