Lehigh Valley Conservative

James Madison argued;

 “The People, not the government possess the absolute sovereignty.”

The Alien and Sedition Act pass 1798 made it illegal to print or speak false or malicious statements about the government.
http://www.answers.com/topic/alien-and-sedition-acts
http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/alsedact.htm

The ability of the citizens to judge and rule themselves depends on them knowing the true character and honesty of any of their fellow citizen running for office.  Therefore it is imperative that the citizen should know the truth of the candidate’s merits and demerits when they are being consider for an office.

Having said that we can quickly come to the supposition that becomes a keystone to Freedom and Liberty.  Freedom of speech becomes not some commodity to be controlled by government but the very essences of the guardian from which all freedoms flow.

Should not the citizens be concerned if it is found that there is a collusion of party’s to subvert truth?  Those given or having the right to print and show the citizens the supposed true character of a person and/or of the situation, are they not charged with and have the duty to give us the truth?  Would it not be a violation of that responsibility if not done?   What if anything should be done in correcting this situation?  This evil of collusion takes on new meaning if viewed with motive and the danger of the act.

Government has a natural propensity to protect itself from being found out especially when it has stepped over the boundaries of law.  This becomes extremely dangerous when we have the very element that is charged to expose this evil now in partnership and collusion with the evil. The motive for government is control and power and the expansion of both, while the other maybe for any number of reasons.  The element that was to be the watchdog for the citizen is now aiding and abetting the very entity it was charged to report. 

Do we now have free speech?  Does it mean something if Joe or Mary citizen speak out on something if they are not heard or just flat ignored?  We have gone from free speech to where it doesn’t matter if one possesses it.  Is there any difference from a neutralized speech then having done away with free speech all together?  I would submit to you that through the ignorance of the citizen, we as the citizens have become neutralized and can no longer make a difference even when allowed to speak.

When speech is neutralized tyranny will prosper.  “We Shall See” if that is not true and “We Shall See” what is about to happen.