If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Daily Caller)   The First Amendment doesn't protect Piers Morgan from deportation, but it does protect him from finding a real job   (dailycaller.com) divider line 176
    More: Amusing, First Amendment, Piers Morgan, deportations, James Taranto  
•       •       •

11476 clicks; posted to Main » on 09 Jan 2013 at 6:43 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



176 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-01-09 07:18:35 PM

duffblue: When we get rid of the 2nd amendment we can work on repealing those pesky 1st and 4th ones.


Yes, it will definitely speed up that whole process.

We'll all be doubleplusgood subjects then.
 
2013-01-09 07:19:07 PM
Please don't send him back. Please, I beg you.
 
2013-01-09 07:19:19 PM
While Alex Jones is kind of a kook he had a lot of points that someone should have brought up to Piers a long time ago. Mexico is a gun free country and they have 50-60 thousand deaths a year from guns. Every day Piers goes to work he passes a security desk. Doesn't he wonder what that big gun looking thing is on their hip?
 
2013-01-09 07:20:16 PM
1. American laws apply to Americans
2. Of course he's not going to be deported, it was a stupid publicity stunt.
 
2013-01-09 07:22:55 PM
There is a difference, the DC is using the wrong issue. In that case the journalist was denied entry into the US which is different than deportation. In order to be deported, he would have to be in violation of his visa. To the best of my knowledge what he is currently doing is not a violation of the J visa.

Worked for INS back when it was INS
 
2013-01-09 07:25:03 PM

BSABSVR: Mean Daddy: Amazing how many First Amendment advocates are out there, but few Second Amendment ones

Says the guy comenting at gunporndaily.com


I'm an advocate for the 2nd Amendment. It is an essential part of our freedom to protect ourselves from those who would do us harm.

What I'm NOT an advocate is allowing private citizens to own an arsenal of whatever ordinance they can get their hands on. "2nd amendment advocates" seem to think that the 2nd Amendment is unlimited.
 
2013-01-09 07:25:12 PM
Who said anything about the first amendment protecting people from deporation. It's the other parts. see "bill of attainder"
 
2013-01-09 07:29:26 PM

BSABSVR: OtherLittleGuy: But I thought the First Amendment doesn't protect you from consequences.

Didn't he do all this on his company's time?

The law that the cite blocked a journalist from being allowed in the country. Which (while despicable) is not the same as deportation. Thia argument that Morgan can be deported is based more on truthiness than anything else as far as I can see.


Kleindienst v. Mandel should still apply.

"In the exercise of Congress' plenary power to exclude aliens or prescribe the conditions for their entry into this country, Congress in 212 (a) (28) of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 has delegated conditional exercise of this power to the Executive Branch. When the Attorney General decides for a legitimate and bona fide reason not to waive the statutory exclusion of an alien, courts will not look behind his decision or weigh it against the First Amendment interests of those who would personally communicate with the alien."

As an alien, Morgan can be excluded (deported) for acts of subversion. Arguably, advocating for abrogation of the Constitution is a subversive act.
 
2013-01-09 07:30:39 PM

Agatha Crispy: Funny how a Rupert Murdoch disciple is so completely embraced by the same Farkers who biatch about Fox.


How does a human paraquat like that get caught as a journalist hacking voicemails and then run to the U.S. and get the plum job at CNN? This in a profession where plagiarism will supposedly get you blacklisted for life.
 
2013-01-09 07:31:50 PM

The Lone Gunman: BSABSVR: Mean Daddy: Amazing how many First Amendment advocates are out there, but few Second Amendment ones

Says the guy comenting at gunporndaily.com

I'm an advocate for the 2nd Amendment. It is an essential part of our freedom to protect ourselves from those who would do us harm.

What I'm NOT an advocate is allowing private citizens to own an arsenal of whatever ordinance they can get their hands on. "2nd amendment advocates" seem to think that the 2nd Amendment is unlimited.


Can you explain what you think is a reasonable arsenal for a private citizen to own?


Also, the word you're looking for is ordnance.
 
2013-01-09 07:32:07 PM
Of course... He stole a job from a hard working American journalist, it should have gone to a Peter Jennings type.

Okay, I don't know anymore journalists.
 
2013-01-09 07:33:51 PM
Please don't send him back, keep jones too. We don't want those farkers.
 
2013-01-09 07:34:04 PM

Mean Daddy: Amazing how many First Amendment advocates are out there, but few Second Amendment ones. Have you ever thought who would ensure the First Amendment rights if there were no guns? Oh that's right Harry Belafonte. It's only for hunting, not to protect us from an overly intrusive gubmint.


Yes, you're going to hold them off with your popgun-show firepower, against their CBW and attack choppers and thermonuclear devices and three-million-strong slave army.

Good luck with that.
 
2013-01-09 07:34:55 PM
The white house's comments on the issue didn't say the 1st amendment protected him from anything, it said that freedom of speech and the press are pretty damn important to this country.

To those 100k+ people who signed this petition, stop trying to get someone you disagree with thrown out of the country you fascists.

For a bunch of people who distrust the government so much, I fail to understand why they need the govt to solve a problem they could solve themselves by simply turning the channel. But the hate takes over I guess.
 
2013-01-09 07:35:00 PM

This text is now purple: BSABSVR: OtherLittleGuy: But I thought the First Amendment doesn't protect you from consequences.

Didn't he do all this on his company's time?

The law that the cite blocked a journalist from being allowed in the country. Which (while despicable) is not the same as deportation. Thia argument that Morgan can be deported is based more on truthiness than anything else as far as I can see.

Kleindienst v. Mandel should still apply.

"In the exercise of Congress' plenary power to exclude aliens or prescribe the conditions for their entry into this country, Congress in 212 (a) (28) of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 has delegated conditional exercise of this power to the Executive Branch. When the Attorney General decides for a legitimate and bona fide reason not to waive the statutory exclusion of an alien, courts will not look behind his decision or weigh it against the First Amendment interests of those who would personally communicate with the alien."

As an alien, Morgan can be excluded (deported) for acts of subversion. Arguably, advocating for abrogation of the Constitution is a subversive act.


Piers Morgan is not arguing for "abrogation of the Constitution".  He is calling for restrictions on the right to bear arms (and remember that it's not certain that the intent of the 2nd Amendment is truly intended to protect the rights of individuals to own guns)  He is no more "abrogating the Constitution" than he would be if he argued in favor of libel law.

But HERR DURR HERP A DERP TRAITOR AND FERRNER
 
2013-01-09 07:35:07 PM
I think the actual point is that Piers Morgan saying things or having an opinion that people dislike is not, by itself, grounds to have him deported.
 
2013-01-09 07:35:09 PM

Mean Daddy: Amazing how many First Amendment advocates are out there, but few Second Amendment ones. Have you ever thought who would ensure the First Amendment rights if there were no guns? Oh that's right Harry Belafonte. It's only for hunting, not to protect us from an overly intrusive gubmint.


While the idea was protection from an intrusive government, that approach really no longer applies. The American military is so ridiculously advanced that Billy and Frank's rifle collection isn't going to protect them from anything. The only would be that troops would refuse to turn on their fellow countrymen, but even then you only need skeleton crew to take down even thousands of revolting citizens. When the law was written, the competition was basically fair between the soldier and the citizen, except perhaps for being outnumbered.

Now personal protection from intruders, wildlife, etc still makes sense. But don't point to gun rights as being necessary to a free state in 2013. The fed will simply drone strike your ass while drinking the morning coffee. Then they'll send a tank just to be sure. Conservatives are the ones always clamoring for a huge, bloated military, so they shouldn't be surprised at the results if they ever tried to take it on.

Also, your remark about there being a dearth of 2nd Amendment advocates is without a doubt the most asstarded thing I've read here today.
 
2013-01-09 07:35:40 PM

Millennium: The First Amendment doesn't protect him if he commits a crime, even if he uses speech to do it, but as far as I'm aware he hasn't done anything illegal. I have no kind words for the man's opinions and motives, but while he is wrong, he hasn't done wrong. Ergo, no grounds for deportation.


He hasn't done anything the British can mount sufficient evidence to charge him, yet. Hopefully something with more evidence than the Leveson Report comes along.

Murdoch, Morgan, and Brooks should be rotting in a British prison.
 
2013-01-09 07:42:42 PM

BSABSVR: SpeedyBB: Weaver95: And yet, I don't think he's getting deported any time soon.

Shot to death perhaps, however.

Do it or shut up, tough guy.


It's tempting...

But not for a silly TeeVee reporter. Many, many more deserving than this dude.

/ Waiting for a disgusted Pentagon to surround Congress and scare those cowardly millionaires into action. Think Curtis LeMay, Alexandra Haig.

// Pres takes a powder back to Kenya.

/// Sells Air Force One to the Somalis.
 
2013-01-09 07:43:01 PM
Every gang banger up from Juarez can run around shooting up East LA without a concern they could get deported back to Old Mexico. Meanwhile some Brit who likes to shoot off nothing more than his mouth has the entirety of the gun toting moron public demand he be deported. Which of these is the greater danger to American society? You can't write shiat like this up.
 
2013-01-09 07:46:14 PM

tyrajam: American laws apply to Americans


This isn't about laws, this is about the Constitution. The Constitution does not apply to Americans, it applies to the government. This is a critical distinction. The Constitution, since it applies specifically to the gov't, affects anybody who is subject to the jurisdiction of the gov't. Citizen, non-citizen, whatever, it matters not at all.
 
2013-01-09 07:46:20 PM
The Bill of Rights applies to anyone on United States soil, yea?
 
2013-01-09 07:46:37 PM
Why can't we see the petition as a sardonic publicity play and leave it at that?
 
2013-01-09 07:46:55 PM

IBelieveYouHaveMyStapler: While Alex Jones is kind of a kook he had a lot of points that someone should have brought up to Piers a long time ago. Mexico is a gun free country and they have 50-60 thousand deaths a year from guns. Every day Piers goes to work he passes a security desk. Doesn't he wonder what that big gun looking thing is on their hip?


Mexico is also a violent nation, culturally. Stats in other, less violence-prone nations (like Japan) are drastically less. The problem, as so many of us have been saying, is a combination of the inaccessibility to free or affordable mental health care, and the culture itself. That's why while any sort of gun ban can't really hurt, it's unlikely to have any measurable impact in a country like the USA.

However, Biden summarized it nicely by saying (paraphrased), "Just because we can't fix everything doesn't mean we're going to do nothing at all." I think that's a good approach and an acknowledgment that America is far, far too gone to actually rid ourselves of all gun violence.
 
2013-01-09 07:51:02 PM
Why anyone would pay attention to the opinion of Piers Morgan, "journalist", utterly escapes me.

/He is in reality, Ed Anger
//obscure?
 
2013-01-09 07:51:38 PM
Is there a petition to have Piers Morgan punched in the face by Clarkson on national TV?

/He is not helping with the gun control argument both because he is not American and because he can have a cock-like nature.
 
2013-01-09 07:56:39 PM
To deport
 
2013-01-09 07:57:06 PM

HellRaisingHoosier: The Bill of Rights applies to anyone on United States soil, yea?


Like invading armies?
"You're under arrest!"
 
2013-01-09 07:57:47 PM
I think we should deport ALL angry, stupid, and well-paid people.
 
2013-01-09 07:58:46 PM

Indubitably: To deport


To meet quota
 
2013-01-09 07:59:13 PM

Wangiss: HellRaisingHoosier: The Bill of Rights applies to anyone on United States soil, yea?

Like invading armies?
"You're under arrest!"


P.S. Your song in the other thread set to "Isn't It Ironic?" needed serious work, man. Did you just shoot that out of yer ass?
 
2013-01-09 07:59:39 PM

Indubitably: I think we should deport ALL angry, stupid, and well-paid people.


That's a farking excellent proposal.
 
2013-01-09 08:00:53 PM

Indubitably: Wangiss: HellRaisingHoosier: The Bill of Rights applies to anyone on United States soil, yea?

Like invading armies?
"You're under arrest!"

P.S. Your song in the other thread set to "Isn't It Ironic?" needed serious work, man. Did you just shoot that out of yer ass?


I'm not the author.
 
2013-01-09 08:01:05 PM

El_Perro: White House press secretary Jay Carney issued a factually incorrect response Wednesday to the White House petition to deport British-born CNN host Piers Morgan, wrongly claiming that Morgan, who has launched repeated televised attacks on the Second Amendment, is protected from deportation by the First Amendment.

"Let's not let arguments over the Constitution's Second Amendment violate the spirit of its First," Carney wrote in response to the petition, which has collected more than 100,000 signatures from patriotic Americans.

While the First Amendment may not, as a technical legal matter, prohibit the Federal Government from deporting a foreign journalist based on the journalist's views, the spirit of the First Amendment certainly weighs against such a deportation.  Nothing "factually incorrect" about Carney's response.


So the Libtards actually believe The Constitution is dead, and a ghost. I get it. He's black.
 
2013-01-09 08:05:52 PM

Mean Daddy: Amazing how many First Amendment advocates are out there, but few Second Amendment ones. Have you ever thought who would ensure the First Amendment rights if there were no guns?


Lawyers?

Cuz that's who is doing it now.
 
2013-01-09 08:07:52 PM

ITGreen: I love listening to British people weigh in on our Constitution.  I wonder how he feels about the Declaration of Independence?


Uh, you realise that a lot of your country's constitution was drawn up by Britons right? And that they drew on the history of the Bill of Rights (1689), Magna Carta and so on?

They condensed several hundred years of tradition into a single document.

You are free to defend Alex Jones, but, on his performance in that interview, don't expect a lot of support. The man is farking insane.

And it's the only time that Piers Morgan has ever come across as being the better man.
 
2013-01-09 08:10:23 PM

Rambino: Mean Daddy: Amazing how many First Amendment advocates are out there, but few Second Amendment ones. Have you ever thought who would ensure the First Amendment rights if there were no guns?

Lawyers?

Cuz that's who is doing it now.


The First Amendment (and for that matter, the Fourth, Fifth, Fourteenth, among others) has done far more to protect us from tyranny than the Second has.
 
2013-01-09 08:16:02 PM
THAT CASE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE CURRENT SITUATION!

There is a huge difference between entry and deportation. A potential alien can be denied entry at any time for any reason. There is no due process.

Once an alien has gained entry and remains in the United States, that alien DOES have some due process. I can't tell you whether he still has full first amendment protections, but that's not at issue here. What is at issue is that they have used a completely inapposite case.

I will say this: If Piers Morgan leaves the country and tries to enter again, he could be excluded from entry for what he has said. He better not take a vacation to Britain any time soon.
 
2013-01-09 08:19:15 PM

ITGreen: I love listening to British people weigh in on our Constitution.  I wonder how he feels about the Declaration of Independence?


Guess that your constitution doesn't hold up to outside scrutiny...
 
2013-01-09 08:21:23 PM

Wangiss: edmo: Laws are derived from the Constitution and they apply to all within the country , citizen or not. Why do people believe the rights within do not also apply? Of course they do.

Like the right to vote?


Yep, if you are eligible. What is your point?
 
2013-01-09 08:24:48 PM

The Lone Gunman: BSABSVR: Mean Daddy: Amazing how many First Amendment advocates are out there, but few Second Amendment ones

Says the guy comenting at gunporndaily.com

I'm an advocate for the 2nd Amendment. It is an essential part of our freedom to protect ourselves from those who would do us harm.

What I'm NOT an advocate is allowing private citizens to own an arsenal of whatever ordinance they can get their hands on. "2nd amendment advocates" seem to think that the 2nd Amendment is unlimited.


Yes.
 
2013-01-09 08:24:48 PM

jigger: 1000 Ways to Dye: The cited court case refers to some being denied entry on a temporary non-immigrant visa

Yes, but the reason to deny it was because of the political opinions of the journalist.


Which still has nothing to do with this situation.
 
2013-01-09 08:27:49 PM

jake_lex: Rambino: Mean Daddy: Amazing how many First Amendment advocates are out there, but few Second Amendment ones. Have you ever thought who would ensure the First Amendment rights if there were no guns?

Lawyers?

Cuz that's who is doing it now.

The First Amendment (and for that matter, the Fourth, Fifth, Fourteenth, among others) has done far more to protect us from tyranny than the Second has.


You are presuming that, given a choice between violence and spending time in court, big business and the government would always choose the less lethal option.

The Homestead Strike, The Battle of Matewan, and the Battle of Blair mountain suggest otherwise.
There is a pretty lengthy history of organized violence in the US simply because force is cheaper than negotiation... or so it seems, up until the people you tried to push around start shooting back. Then things get messy and you start to hemorrhage real money.

The threat of escalation is what keeps people negotiating in the courtroom, not just the words on paper.
 
2013-01-09 08:31:44 PM

Lionel Mandrake: Big macho gun guys want the bad man to go away?

Man up, pussies.


So we should just shoot him instead?
 
2013-01-09 08:34:45 PM

chumboobler: ITGreen: I love listening to British people weigh in on our Constitution.  I wonder how he feels about the Declaration of Independence?

I'm sure the Brits are long over it. It was a few hundred years ago. My ex wife can hold a grudge like no one I've ever seen but a few hundred years is beyond even her capacity. Americans are no longer the upstart bootstrappy folks they envision themselves to be for the most part. There is entrepreneurial spirit all over the globe. It is not a uniquely American trait as some believe.

People have opinions. Americans hold the right to free speech as sacred from what I can tell. If I look at some of the supporting documents surrounding your independence a phrase comes to mind and that is "all men are created equal". It does not say American men. It says all. No country specified.


Yeah, well, they pretty much turffed that concept. See, despite the almost godlike reverence they have for some of their founding fathers, the declaration doesn't have force of law.
 
2013-01-09 08:39:12 PM

Ennuipoet: GAT_00: For people who celebrate your right to say whatever you want, Republicans seem quite intent on making sure Piers Morgan is denied any ability to speak to the American people.

They only recognize that particular right when the speaker is saying something they agree with.


What happened to the author of that youtube video?

Which party is fighting to take away the right to buy political ads from corporations, and individuals like sheldin adleson, but not unions?

Which party has the habit of storming stages or throwing pies at speakers they disagree with?
 
2013-01-09 08:41:37 PM

IBelieveYouHaveMyStapler: While Alex Jones is kind of a kook he had a lot of points that someone should have brought up to Piers a long time ago. Mexico is a gun free country and they have 50-60 thousand deaths a year from guns. Every day Piers goes to work he passes a security desk. Doesn't he wonder what that big gun looking thing is on their hip?


Mexico is a gun free country? Are you insane? Yeah, they have laws to that effect, but their rule of law broke down a long time ago. Protip* Had to do with corruption and money, not their laws.
 
2013-01-09 08:42:30 PM
Pierced Organ
 
2013-01-09 08:42:51 PM

Mike_1962: chumboobler: ITGreen: I love listening to British people weigh in on our Constitution.  I wonder how he feels about the Declaration of Independence?

I'm sure the Brits are long over it. It was a few hundred years ago. My ex wife can hold a grudge like no one I've ever seen but a few hundred years is beyond even her capacity. Americans are no longer the upstart bootstrappy folks they envision themselves to be for the most part. There is entrepreneurial spirit all over the globe. It is not a uniquely American trait as some believe.

People have opinions. Americans hold the right to free speech as sacred from what I can tell. If I look at some of the supporting documents surrounding your independence a phrase comes to mind and that is "all men are created equal". It does not say American men. It says all. No country specified.

Yeah, well, they pretty much turffed that concept. See, despite the almost godlike reverence they have for some of their founding fathers, the declaration doesn't have force of law.


No it does not have the force of law. It does however, capture the spirit of things. If you adamantly revere the founding fathers thoughts within the constitution then you must respect their other work as well. It may not have binding effects like the constitution but these infallible gentlemen must be given their due. Not every American but all men. And that must mean that all men, if created equally, as the founding fathers say they are, can expect the protection that the constitution affords. This includes brits working in the USA. Free speech is not a sometimes thing. It is a right for all regardless of nation. Even if their own nations don't recognize it. If you do not believe that then you believe that governments can decide arbitrarily what we may view as a right.
 
2013-01-09 08:43:38 PM

The Lone Gunman: BSABSVR: Mean Daddy: Amazing how many First Amendment advocates are out there, but few Second Amendment ones

Says the guy comenting at gunporndaily.com

I'm an advocate for the 2nd Amendment. It is an essential part of our freedom to protect ourselves from those who would do us harm.

What I'm NOT an advocate is allowing private citizens to own an arsenal of whatever ordinance they can get their hands on. "2nd amendment advocates" seem to think that the 2nd Amendment is unlimited.


This I can support.
 
Displayed 50 of 176 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report