Scroll down to read this post.


Please consider supporting my work here at Behind The Black by giving either a one-time contribution or a regular subscription, in any one of the following ways:


1. Zelle: This is the only internet method that charges no fees. All you have to do is use the Zelle link at your internet bank and give my name and email address (zimmerman at nasw dot org). What you donate is what I get.


2. Donate through Gabpay, using my email address zimmerman @ nasw dot org.

3. Patreon: Go to my website there and pick one of five monthly subscription amounts, or by making a one-time donation.

4. A Paypal Donation:

4. A Paypal subscription:

5. Donate by check, payable to Robert Zimmerman and mailed to
Behind The Black
c/o Robert Zimmerman
P.O.Box 1262
Cortaro, AZ 85652

Democrats vote to squelch free speech

Fascists: The Democrats in the Senate tonight voted in favor of a constitutional amendment to partially repeal the first amendment.

Tonight the Senate voted 78-18 to advance the Democrats’ proposal to amend the Constitution to give Congress the power to prohibit or restrict participation in political campaigns. A number of Republicans voted to advance the bill, but will oppose it in debate and will vote against it. Charles Grassley said, “We should have debate on this important amendment. The majority should be made to answer why they want to silence critics.”

I call them fascists without shame, as that’s what they are. Their only reason for pushing this amendment is to silence their critics and shut down freedom, which is what fascists do. Sadly, there appears to be about 40% of the American populace that agrees with them. I call them fascists as well.

Conscious Choice cover

Now available in hardback and paperback as well as ebook!


From the press release: In this ground-breaking new history of early America, historian Robert Zimmerman not only exposes the lie behind The New York Times 1619 Project that falsely claims slavery is central to the history of the United States, he also provides profound lessons about the nature of human societies, lessons important for Americans today as well as for all future settlers on Mars and elsewhere in space.

Conscious Choice: The origins of slavery in America and why it matters today and for our future in outer space, is a riveting page-turning story that documents how slavery slowly became pervasive in the southern British colonies of North America, colonies founded by a people and culture that not only did not allow slavery but in every way were hostile to the practice.  
Conscious Choice does more however. In telling the tragic history of the Virginia colony and the rise of slavery there, Zimmerman lays out the proper path for creating healthy societies in places like the Moon and Mars.


“Zimmerman’s ground-breaking history provides every future generation the basic framework for establishing new societies on other worlds. We would be wise to heed what he says.” —Robert Zubrin, founder of founder of the Mars Society.


All editions are available at Amazon, Barnes & Noble, and all book vendors, with the ebook priced at $5.99 before discount. The ebook can also be purchased direct from my ebook publisher, ebookit, in which case you don't support the big tech companies and I get a bigger cut much sooner.


Autographed printed copies are also available at discount directly from me (hardback $24.95; paperback $14.95; Shipping cost for either: $5.00). Just email me at zimmerman @ nasw dot org.


  • CS Goldstein

    There is a very well laid out explanation, yesterday, ( Sept.8)in WSJ by Ted Olsen. He succinctly presents Reid’s and the Democrats’ motivations,
    dissecting them, and explaining the lawsuits that they are intentionally misinterpreting for
    their purposes. The Founders’ provisions for changing, altering, or adopting an Amendment are
    discussed as well. He provides sufficient ammunition for Republicans and Independents to get out ahead
    of the Dem.’s propaganda and counter this attempt at change- in other words to control the Truth of the message.

  • DK Williams

    Who are the Republicans who voted for this?

  • I don’t have a list as yet, but I strongly suspect in this case that they all did so to make sure the amendment reached the floor so it could be debated, not to endorse it.

    This Democratic effort to change and limit the first amendment is campaign gold for the Republicans. The more they can put them on record for wanting to squelch free speech, the better.

  • “Sadly, there appears to be about 40% of the American populace that agrees with them. ”

    Only 40%? A plurality voted for Obama. Twice.

  • geoffc

    You all misunderstand. As a Canadian living in the US, it is completely obvious that the Second Amendment is all about the “right to arm bears” (gives them a fighting chance), simple typo.

    The First Amendment is only there to protect speech those in power approve of. After all, if you let the plebes say whatever they want, they will say mean stuff, and hurt the feelings of the precious snowflakes in power.

    Can’t let people say things that hurt feelings, or are hard to hear. That would be crazy! As crazy as allowing the citizenry to defend itself.

    What kind of crazy country would you end up with?

    200+ years of democracy? Not on this planet! It would become a hell hole, where everyone shoots each other and hurts their feelings. Can’t have that happening!

  • Cotour

    This proposal is IMO an attempt to pander to the ignorant in the country who equate the ruling that corporations are “people”. This proposed amendment will go nowhere related to an actual amendment to the Constitution being passed and installed, it is a tool that the Democrats are machining on their political lathe now so it can be used later as a talking point and political club to tune and energize their uninformed and emotional base.

    That being said it is not a hard point to make to the general public that their is a dirty underbelly in our politics (there is) where corporate money is what is chased by the political class and there in lies where their loyalty will be most strategically concentrated. While we can give real world examples of where company’s and billionaires have spent millions generously to support or defeat policy and law that they favor or oppose. The most recent example is Micheal Bloomberg and gun control legislation and politicians who support them. They loose no matter how much they spend but the ever pressing potential of the existence of such funds does have its effects.

    I am always taking the temperature of the public and what motivates them in their thinking and judging by my most recent investigations this will be an effective talking point but not a potential actual amendment. The public thinks in emotional terms and not in more complex terms in many instances.

    It is not for government to determine how much money is to be spent by whomever on political speech, it is up to the people and for the people to allow this shift is a basic mistake related to the peoples freedoms. But the public becomes confused between the government who they have a “good” paternal feeling about and what the objective Constitution actually lays out. And that is what this is all about, IMO of course.

  • Cotour

    This is a too absolute statement:

    “They loose no matter how much they spend but the ever pressing potential of the existence of such funds does have its effects.”

    They are sometime successful.

  • Edward

    Are you guys out of your freaking minds!?!

    Six years ago, would any of you have thought that the Supreme Court would have had the audacity to rule that the government could direct its subjects as to how to spend their own money? Of course not; they are supposed to protect our rights, not ensure that the government becomes a tyranny and take away our rights.

    Yet it happened.

    In fact, would any of you have thought that Congress would have the balls to pass a such a law in the first place? Of course not. We elect them; they are supposed to be on *our* side. They are supposed to listen to our petitions of grievance (will *that* remain in the First Amendment?). They are there to serve us, not to lord over us and direct us as to what we *must* do.

    And yet it happened.

    There was never a majority of Americans in favor of Obamacare. There were many Americans going to town hall meetings to make heard their disapproval of it, yet Democrat representatives refused to consider these grievances, even going so far as to say things such as, “I don’t worry about the Constitution.”

    Every step of progress made toward enacting such a heinous amendment is a danger to We the People, right now, and that the party we have been relying in vain to protect our rights has voted in favor of even discussing such an atrocious amendment is a shock, surprise, and betrayal. These idiots have put far too much effort into doing the wrong thing in hopes of garnering votes, that it was difficult to trust them before they pulled off this bonehead move. Their attempts to get groups to change their voting habits by advocating the what amounts to ignoring or bypassing our laws merely makes the Republicans and Democrats look equally corrupt.

    It may *seem* like putting Democrats on record as supporting this thing is a good idea, but the Republicans are now on record as supporting it enough to discuss it. The risk of it becoming a Constitutional Amendment (which may seem as unlikely now as government telling us how to spend our money did six years ago) is completely unacceptable. This misguided Republican strategy (one of many in recent years) may very well backfire on We the People and, like Obamacare and our anemic economy, end up as yet another “new normal.” Do we really want all of America to end up looking like Detroit, the progressive’s model city?

    How the hell can we be reassured that the Republicans who voted in favor of “discussing” this betrayal of the Constitution will change back later. How do we know that they will not “go for it” and pass this abomination in hopes that, once they have a majority next year, *they* will control political discourse in America and will lord over their opponents? What do they say about absolute power corrupting absolutely?

    This is a barking mad idea, and the Republicans should have rejected it even more soundly than they rejected the Obamacare fiasco. (Indeed, it is only because the traitorous Senator Snow voted to vote on Obamacare that we are stuck with that dictatorial form of (mis)governance. If it weren’t for her, Obamacare might just be a lesson in controlling our federal representatives. After all, they are supposed to be working for We the People, not themselves.) At the rate that we are losing our freedoms to an ever more tyrannical government, in Obama’s America, there is no way to consider this anything but a bad and dangerous move.

    Obamacare already has prohibited our freedom to exercise religion per the First Amendment, and various courts have been following suit on their rulings of various lawsuits. Our freedoms are eroding at an alarming rate. Why wouldn’t a seemingly simple, minor infraction of the First Amendment be next?

    Think about it: what kinds of countries are the ones that control political speech?

    We are in serious trouble, here, and should this become an Amendment, it will be unlikely that we will gain permission to voice our opinions against it. Or any other government action.

    Ever again.

  • Cotour

    This will never become an amendment, it is a political tool that is being forged today to be used tomorrow as a talking point during debate in order to move people through emotion. Think of the actual process that must take place for the Constitution to be amended, it is fairly complex and timely. Other tools that the democrats are forging right now? 1. The indictment of Rick Perry, 2. The immigration debate (emotionally connecting to the Latino populous, 3. Gay rights / marriage, 4. Any anti gun legislation that bans guns (which actually makes people less safe), 5. Abortion, I could go on, the point being that all of these issues combined tend to or is intended to make the people listening to the debate to connect emotionally.

    Like it or not people tend to make decisions based in emotion and in what and who they “like” and not based in logic, and the democrats are masters of emotion, to all our detriment.

    I do appreciate your passion.

  • Edward

    “Think of the actual process that must take place for the Constitution to be amended”

    And to allow the government to determine how We the People as to how to spend our own money had not been thinkable, six years ago. I am willing to bet that back then you didn’t dream that such a tyranny could happen in America, much less would happen. Yet now you are willing to take the risk that government usurps our God given natural right to free speech.

    (We know this is a natural right, because even the creatures in nature are allowed to sound off when ever and about whatever they feel inclined to do so. But here we are, with an actual proposal on the floor to take this right away from We the People, the formerly free.)

    When you open the door, bad things can slip through. That is why we keep our doors locked, but the Republicans opened this door and invited this bad thing into the room. Republican Snow opened the door to Obamacare, and see what happened?

    And how are any of these other tools that you mention working out for you? Each one has gone badly for the Constitution, the will of the people, the rule of law, or various combinations of these three. We the People keep losing our freedoms due to such “tools” (yeah, I mean the people involved as well as the political tactics).

    The best move is to NOT open the door to tyranny. It has a way of slipping in uninvited.

    So yes, I think you are bat-stuff crazy for taking this so lightly.

  • Edward

    Sorry, I forgot to make the point related to the quoted comment.

    The process for us to lose the right to determine how to spend our own money took many turns, including some that were unusual or even unconstitutional. It even took a Supreme Court Justice to redefine the law so that it would appear to be Constitutional.

    Do not underestimate the treachery of tyrants against their subjects.

  • Edward,

    You wrote: “I think you are bat-stuff crazy for taking this so lightly.”

    I know you don’t mean it as an ad hominen attack, but please avoid writing things like this in the future. As you know, I strong insist that the discussion here remain civil at all times.

    Besides, if you have read anything either I or Cotour has written you know that we really agree with you on this subject. We are merely describing the political maneuvering that is going on in the Republican Party.

  • Edward

    Sorry for the insult. Got carried away with the emotion of the moment. Embarrassed to be admonished.

    But I also think that the Republicans are crazy for allowing this to go forward, considering the track record of the (lack of) protections of our freedoms. These political maneuverings could end badly. Again.

    We have seen these guys get out maneuvered over Obamacare, they oppose conservative Republican candidates, and they keep being on the verge of taking the Democrats’ advice about illegal immigration, so they aren’t thinking clearly. Or worse, *are* thinking clearly with some goal in mind other than what We the People want.

  • We are not in disagreement about the overall incompetence of the Republican leadership. They too often act ashamed of what they stand for and are thus always outmaneuvered.

    This article explains this quite well. I especially like the opening quote from John Madden, “The only thing the ‘prevent defense’ does it prevent you from winning.” For decades I’ve watched bad teams in the NFL throw away wins by playing prevent defense, while the good teams never do and thus win. Thus we have the Republicans for the past two decades.

    Things are changing however. A new generation of conservatives is moving into power. Be hopeful. This amendment will fail, and things will improve.

  • Cotour

    I certainly do agree with you Edward except I have come to understand that this is an ongoing process that never ends, its a continually changing shade of gray that that bounces from light to dark. If you take every event that goes on in the perverted world that is politics in such a personal and narrow way then it is bound to make you insane. Keep perspective and keep on keeping on.

    I know I say this kind of stuff a lot, and I will continue to say it as long as I have to because people must understand this game of strategies and the acquisition of and the retention of power that we are all involved in in a little different way. If we are able to be constantly confused and polarized then “they” win and we all loose.

Readers: the rules for commenting!


No registration is required. I welcome all opinions, even those that strongly criticize my commentary.


However, name-calling and obscenities will not be tolerated. First time offenders who are new to the site will be warned. Second time offenders or first time offenders who have been here awhile will be suspended for a week. After that, I will ban you. Period.


Note also that first time commenters as well as any comment with more than one link will be placed in moderation for my approval. Be patient, I will get to it.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *