2008.08.15
The attorney general clamps down on the First Amendment
What does one learn at the ultra-Christian, right-wing Regent University law school?
If you're disgraced Justice Department employee Monica Goodling, you learn that fealty to Republican causes, Jesus and George W. Bush are more important than the rule of law and justice.
If you're Virginia Attorney General Bob McDonnell, you learn that the First Amendment isn't worth squat if it stands in the way of holding water for a radically conservative agenda.
The latest move by the likely Republican gubernatorial nominee to squelch freedom came this week. McDonnell's office appealed a federal court decision that a state law forbidding college newspapers from accepting ads for alcohol is unconstitutional. The decision also overturned limits on what content is permissible in such ads at any newspaper, not just college ones. The law had banned words like "bar" and "happy hour."
The original lawsuit challenging the law was brought by the parent company of Virginia Tech's The Collegiate Times and the University of Virginia's The Cavalier Daily. (We wrote about it here.)
Once again, McDonnell chooses to appease his base rather than seek to uphold Constitutional rights.
During the appeal, the original ruling stands. Students returning to Blacksburg and Charlottesville this weekend should tip one back for the AG. Check your campus paper for good ideas about where to do it.
RSS feed 
You've got to be kidding. The first amendment doesn't always stand in educational environments. How can you condone liquor ads to underage colleg students.
Where were you when the second amendment was under fire after the Tech shootings?
Just as the second amendment is restricted by backgound checks, journalists should have to pass strict tests of intelligence before being allowed to write newspaper columns.
Comment by Ted — August 15, 2008 @ 4:39 pm
"What does one learn at the ultra-Christian, right-wing Regent University law school?"
That the media tries to force an agenda on its readers by labeling organizations it doesn't like with biased code words?
Comment by Henry — August 15, 2008 @ 4:49 pm
Talk about a waste of state funds. How much will this appeal cost the taxpayers?
The ABC laws control the sales.
Comment by Blue John — August 15, 2008 @ 5:43 pm
The key phrase to the whole article "likely Republican gubernatorial nominee". Never too early to start the demonization.
Christian, whats funny about you attacks on conservatives is that your agenda is just as radically liberal as the examples that you give for begin radically conservative. Bet we will never read the following word in any of your columns: Ultra Liberal, left wing etc
Comment by Darren — August 15, 2008 @ 9:00 pm
Speaking of agendas and squelching the First Amendment, when are we going to see cigarette ads on TV again?
It was libs who got those banned, wasn't it?
Comment by Josh — August 15, 2008 @ 9:33 pm
This isn't much of a surprise coming from an editor who thinks the use of alcohol is a necessity in the socialization of young people. By the way, UVA is in Charlottesville, VA not Charlotte, NC.
Comment by C Ramsey — August 15, 2008 @ 11:24 pm
I think I have finally figured out the RT EB.
They write this stuff knowing it will start a Fire under the right wing cause.
There is no way that a normal human being can actually believe this stuff they write.
As u can see the only time they Mention the word Jesus s when it is going to be used in a negatve way. I wonder what the EB's preachers think of there ideaology.
Well if they have one.
5 responses and all 5 are blasting the EB, kinda tells us something doesnt it.
Will the papers owners ever get that this constent view is hurting them financially.
Comment by HERB KREBS — August 16, 2008 @ 7:24 am
Thanks for catching the typo, Ramsey. I've corrected it.
Comment by c. trejbal — August 16, 2008 @ 8:48 am
Rule of law and justice is relative. When Obama and other liberals undermine the 2nd Amendment to the US Constitution, then the "law and justice" need to be disobeyed.
Comment by Jim — August 16, 2008 @ 8:48 am
Herb...
Apparently their views aren't hurting too badly. You keep coming back to their web site and commenting.
It worries me that so many are seemingly wanting to do away with two points of view. Almost in the same way that people are promoting the notion that we only need one party.
That, to me, is getting precipitously close to wanting one party rule which leads to dictatorship.
Probably not what you want.
Comment by Will — August 16, 2008 @ 8:53 am
By the way folks...in case your memories have really gone "round the bend"... there have been alcohol parties on and off college campuses for more years than any of us care to admit we've been around.
PGA parties, fraternity and sorority social mixers, pledge parties all of which have had some level of libation mixed in.
So before you all get on your sanctimonious high horses, remember that we all were young once...and please don't be too selective with your respective memories. It's not becoming to try to fool your peers.
Comment by Will — August 16, 2008 @ 8:58 am
This article was in The Cavalier Daily referenced above.
http://www.cavalierdaily.com/CVArticle.asp?ID=33482&pid=1730
I don't think an ad for booze will make much difference to these folks.
Comment by Blue John — August 16, 2008 @ 9:07 am
Will,
Good point. Several of the posters appear to despise liberals and the editorial board, yet they continue to try and push their conservative self righteous agenda.
Reminds me of the "Sunday Christians".
Comment by Blue John — August 16, 2008 @ 9:48 am
Neither the editorial writer nor some of the commenters seem to understand that the job of the Attorney General is to try to uphold the validity of laws passed by the Virginia General Assembly.
What the Attorney General may think of the law is irrelevant-- unless there is a U. S. Supreme Court decision on point, over-ruling an identical state or federal law on federal grounds, the Attorney General's JOB is to be actively involved in litigation to uphold state laws. The editorial writer would apparently be happier if the Attorney General decided that he could effectively veto any General Assembly legislation by refusing to enforce it based on his personal views.
Comment by Peter — August 16, 2008 @ 10:19 am
Will,
Another bright issue.
I dont pay for this web site it is free.
Also I dont by the paper it is free online.
The only reason I keep coming back is to put forth a opinion that will debunk left wing anti american rederict.Rememeber Will there is a dfferance as to weather I pay for Junk opinions or not.So fact is the RT has lost readership and I would bet it is due to the Bush bashing, military bashing, christen bashing and so forth.
As far as one party rule that would suit the RT and and you very well that is why there is so much anti america, socialist comments in this EB.
Good journalism and fairness builds a paper, onsidedness kills one.
Take a look at the no.s and tell me which one the RT is on if you can be honest.
Comment by HERB KREBS — August 16, 2008 @ 11:08 am
Peter, you are correct that McDonnell did his job defending the law in the lower court. You err, however, in claiming that he has no choice but to appeal the court decision. Appeals are at his discretion. He defended it and could have stood by the decision and the first amendment. He chose not to do so.
John, I don't recall ever arguing for curbing Second Amendment rights. That said, you and I no doubt have different understandings of what the Amendment actually says.
As for responding to comments, I respond to many but cannot respond to all. I apologize for having been busy Friday night and Saturday. This forum exists for discussion by readers, which has been taking place on this thread and others.
Comment by c. trejbal — August 16, 2008 @ 3:07 pm
A lot of the posters mention that the Roanoke Times readership is declining. With the internet and online versions of newspapers, the Roanoke Times is one of many that have a decline in subscriptions. They are also one of many that enjoy an INCREASE IN ONLINE VIEWERS.
Why do people try to make this an issue?
Comment by Blue John — August 16, 2008 @ 9:11 pm
Blue,
I would lke to still have a home town paper and enjoy reading it as well.
The issue I make is that the paper is failing due to left wing reteric. They may enjoy a bost on the online viewership but that doesnt help the bottom line.
If the readership continues on this path there will be loss of jobs and poss. more.
My point is why does the RT parent co. along with alot of other papers around the country, which are dwindeling as well, continue to hire people that are not in step with the other half of the country. Most EB'S around the country 85% are very far left.
Why dont the RT hire a few that have our views at the forefront as well.
Comment by HERB KREBS — August 17, 2008 @ 6:54 am
Herb...
Bush deserves to be called on the carpet for his administration. NO ONE has bashed the military. They have done an incredible job in circumstances that neither you nor I would have the guts to endure. The people that you call christians could not be further from the actual fact; not the way that I was taught by some mighty good parents at least.
As for being anti-American, why do you suppose I challenge people daily to think beyond the ends of their noses...to stop their self-absorbed greed and to think about the condition we're going to leave this planet in for the generations to come?
If I were indeed anti-American, why would I stop there? Why not just become anti-world? Why would I care? Indeed!
I come back to this web site for exactly the same reasons you do Herb. To debunk the myths and rumors and inuendo that is put forth by the side you claim to be on.
In the end, we should hope that there is compromise and joint effort to solve problems rather than have the system be the obsticle.
Comment by Will — August 17, 2008 @ 8:18 am
Blue John,
Increase from what? Zero? More and more people are online, period. How do you know the revenue from online ads keeps pace with the loss from the decline in newspapers sold?
Conservative television and radio shows beat the pants off their liberal competition. I suspect liberal newspapers are taking a hit like liberal programming, and for the same reason: people want truthful sources.
Comment by Josh — August 17, 2008 @ 9:31 am
Daily circulation of the Washington Post 699,130 (April 2007).
Daily circulation of the Washington Times 102,351 (March 2007).
Riding the Va. Railway Express (VRE) on my daily commute 1997-2003 from Fredericksburg to Crystal City also proved the roughly 7:1 ratio based on the number of papers distributors put out each morning.
Comment by Gary — August 17, 2008 @ 8:15 pm
Gary,
We've covered this before. The Post's circulation has been dropping like a rock. Other liberal newspapers are faring even worse.
Comment by Josh — August 17, 2008 @ 9:58 pm
My earlier comparison was based on April & March 2007 numbers, respectively. The most recent 2008 trends, which I found, are:
The Washington Post was ranked No. 7 with average daily circulation of 673,180, down 3.57 percent from 698,116 a year ago.
At The Washington Times, average daily circulation for the six-month period ended March 31 declined 6.47 percent to 93,775 from 100,257 a year ago.
Comment by Gary — August 18, 2008 @ 7:44 am
Gary,
Let's see. January 2000, the Times' circulation was at about 90,000. Now you say's 93,775. That's a rise of 4%
During the same period, the Post dropped from 800,000 to 673,000, a 16% drop.
Comment by Josh — August 18, 2008 @ 9:50 am
"Increase from what? Zero?"
That's right Josh.
Zero is the traditional starting point.
Comment by Blue John — August 18, 2008 @ 10:11 am