Our favorite wingnut columnist, Kaye Grogan, has a new column up.  It’s called "Freedom of speech and expression . . . most abused rights"  The title alone suggests that Kaye is having trouble with verbs this week, as she prefers to use ellipses.  Still, we forge on:

Freedom of speech is perhaps one of the most abused freedoms we have. From profanity to nudity these moral destroyers are acceptable and protected, and yet the freedoms associated with religion are met with disdain, and attempts to suppress those of faith is gaining momentum.

Looks like Kaye is also having problems with punctuation, subject-verb agreement, and — well — basic sentence structure too.

When I hear how pornography is protected under the "freedom of expression" I have to laugh. Since the people back in the days before the Constitution was drafted kept their clothes on, I doubt very seriously that they had pornographic images in mind, so it’s a big stretch to say this smut — is covered under the "Bill of Rights."

One wonders — how people back in the days before the Constitution managed to create more people, what with all the clothes-wearing they did.   Still, we know Kaye is speaking with a first-grader’s education of the Founding Fathers, totally ignorant of — for example — the fact that Ben Franklin was a milf-man.  And don’t get us started about Thomas Jefferson.

But you — have to applaud Kaye’s brand of logic.  Of course, people back in the days before the Constitution didn’t have the Internet — so, technically speaking, anything Kaye writes is not covered under the "Bill of Rights" either.  In fact, back then, women discussing political matters was seen as distasteful. 

Freedom of speech and freedom of expression does not give a person the right to do things that are detrimental to society as a whole.

And who gets get to decide what is "detrimental to society as a whole", Kaye?

When people have a problem conducting themselves in a proper manner — they have to be reigned in.

Or reined in, I suppose.  Unless they’re kings.

Bank robbers could be viewed as utilizing their freedom of expression, because they are expressing their desire to take money that doesn’t belong to them. Rapists could be viewed as just fulfilling their desires. So, you see — there has to be a restriction on freedom of expression.

And people who pray to God could be viewed as engaging in the Crusades and inquisitions, therefore we must restrict prayer.  Hey!  This is fun!!

I guess Kaye’s point is that because stupid people like Kaye could call anything "expression", we should limit "expression".

While freedom of speech gives us the right to verbally express how we feel, it does not give us the right to curse and abuse other people.

Of course it does!  Kaye confuses what we have a right to do, with what is the right thing to do.

Some things require self-control and respect. But unfortunately there will always be those who will pontificate that they have a right to do whatever they please.

Kaye, honey, look in the mirror.

There are many anti-religious and pro-abortion groups who are sweating the confirmation of Judge Samuel A. Alito to the U.S. Supreme Court, because they are fearful that he is a champion for the religious right and mutilated babies.

Samuel Alito is the champion for mutilated babies?  I hope I’m not being too partisan here, but if that’s true, maybe he really shouldn’t be confirmed.

This is a prime example of how these groups are under the impression that they are the bomb — when it comes to controlling free speech. Boy, this is pathetic!

No, Kaye-dog.  It’s whack, yo.

For years, conservatives have had to stand by watching an out-of-control high court make erroneous rulings that have capitulated Americans into a cesspool of filth.

Still having verb trouble, I see.  Americans (supposedly) capitulate, Kaye.  Rulings don’t.

And now that the tide may be changing — it’s time to push the panic button for many.

But only while counting chickens before the sky is falling.  Block that metaphor!

They fear the inroads they have paved to change society for years, is in jeopardy of turning around to the other side. Boy, what a day of rejoicing that will be!

The inroads is in jeopardy?  Okay, now I’m lost.  Someone is turning the pavement around?  What?

While all indications point toward Judge Alito being a champion for unborn babies, I have qualms about his statement that the Constitution does not provide protection for the unborn.

Harumph.  Some "champion for unborn babies" he turned out to be!

Pray tell what does provide protection against the slaughtering of innocent babies?

Methinks obviously not the Constitution, since it doesn’t say anything about it, right?

It must be you know what for pro-abortion advocates to spend the biggest part of their lives getting up every morning trying to decide what their next strategy will be — to keep the murdering of little innocent babies legalized. What a bloody life!

I can’t speak for others, but I only get up every morning once a day — usually in the morning.  I don’t spend the biggest part of my life getting up.  In fact, I don’t spend the biggest part of my day getting up.  Because once you’re up, you’re up.

Let’s see now — does the killing of babies fall under the freedom of expression clause? I guess this crutch is as good as any cramped under the umbrella of evil.

Let’s see.  Kayes writes an article about the freedom of expression clause, wedges in the issue of abortion, and then makes fun of others because they (supposedly) equate the abortion issue with the freedom of expression clause.  Pundit, heal thyself!

But I choose instead to fixate on the "umbrella of evil", because it sounds like something a James Bond villain would carry.

As the contentious battles between good and evil continue on a daily basis, the so-called 85 percent of the population who claim to be Christians need to use their freedom of speech — while they still have a voice.

Kaye, if you are going to say that Christians comprise 85% of the population, don’t defeat your argument by writing "the so-called 85%".  It’s sounds like you are doubting your own statistic.

That said, I have to laugh at the notion that 85% of the population is the oppressed minority here.

Right now they are lying dormant (mostly unresponsive — just warming pews) while their religious freedoms are evaporating faster than smoke from a teapot.

It’s steam, dear, not smoke.  Unless you fail to put water in the teapot first, in which case it very well might be smoke.

In Amendment 1 of the Bill of Rights where it reads: or the right of the people peacefully to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances — indicates that this is the only form of freedom of expression outlined in the 10 amendments.

Anyone care to diagram that sentence?

Amendment 10 reads: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people. Time and time again, the people in every state (with the exception of Massachusetts and Oregon) have voted down same-sex marriages and pornography. So, something is more than just a little amiss here.

Boy, is there ever!  You’ve overlooked the 14th Amendment.

It is completely to the extreme when gavels of liberal judges are finalizing errant rulings, overriding established laws and the will of the people.

Yes, it is "to the extreme".  Rad and narly, too.  And that’s Kaye, finalizing her opinion!