Here is a comment from yesterday's seminal cool cats post on the SB 154 Bruce McKay Highway bill, and how Liko Kenney has been denied procedural and substantive due process:
Wow, I personally feel that King was treated far differently than other speakers. Sharon Davis was allowed to read a letter that was based on Mckay's father's personal opinion about the laws, etc in our country and how ALL of the country was different than when he grew up...how off track is that from the topic, yet it was allowed. Davis spent her time also speaking about "that day" and not the bill!
KingCast says: There is no doubt that Madame Chair practiced viewpoint based First Amendment Discrimination.
I hope you lawyers don't need me to explain that, it's obvious.
For you laypeople, Sharon Davis McKay and others were permitted to testify about the quality and quantity of complaints issued against Bruce McKay.
They were also permitted to testify about issues that were the byproduct of Kelly Ayotte's investigation.
But I was not permitted to call any of that into question, which is ludicrous given the emails I have sent to the Committee and my history with this case and the thousands of hours I have spent thoroughly documenting everything I say.
That is a Content-based restriction, which is impermissible in an open forum like this. I have changed law and policy on a similar matter in New Hampshire, read it right here, here is page two and it's part of the reason why Mayor Streeter awarded me a First Amendment Commendation.
Mayor Streeter has the longest tenure of anyone on the Governor's Council, so heck no, I'm not going to tolerate this sort of First Amendment abuse lightly. The name of the blog is the name of the game, I thought you knew.
Instead I will note it for the record and keep on keepin' on, as Mother Ann would want it.
PS: The spent shell casings conclusively prove that Gregory Floyd and Kelly Ayotte are World-Class liars. Click the links in the "nigger, spear chucker, jungle bunny post."
PPS: I didn't get interrupted when I spoke before the Massachusetts Senate (Watch me discuss the bill I conceived, "Robert Taylor's Law" here), so why now? We know why. It's called Unconstitutional, viewpoint-based discrimination.