Rehashed Fashion

Site menu:



1984 2012 election aca AP audit the fed austrian school of economics awakening bazaar berkner bernanke bill o'reilly brave new world BRICs bush bush sr chemtrail chris brown constitution corruption creativity cspan david icke debt democrat depression domestic violence Dresses economic collapse Economic Commentary Education election empire endless war end the fed executive order existential fascism fashion federal reserve fiat currency flint foreign policy fox news freedom free market funny gold gun control gw bush hemp homeland security honest money hyperinflation ice storm illuminati indefinite detention inflation katrina pierson language legalization libertarian liberty lookadoo lv berkner m3 Macroeconomics marijuana monetary policy money mr. mackey ndaa obama obama. 2012 election obamacare Original Political Cartoons paul krugman peace pete sessions political cartoon Political commentary Political Satire preparedness prepper propaganda protest Public education qe rehashed fashion reptilian republican republican governors association rga rights rihanna role model Romney ron paul second amendment silver society collapse south park Student Showcase stupid tranco couture united states vaccines Vermin supreme war on drugs water

Madam Feinstein, I’m slightly concerned for your mental health.

By Brittany Yurkovitch on 8/18/2013

Questions are good.

Dear Dianne Feinstein,

Recently, a former AP Economics teacher wrote a letter to the massive state surveillance system and since I know you introduced the last internet censorship bill, PIPA, voted to extend the Patriot Act, and introduced legislation to ban semi-automatic rifles or “assault weapons” as you masters of propaganda like to say, I figured I would address this letter directly to you. Hopefully, one of your cronies at the NSA can funnel this letter to you in case it ends up in your spam box.

I am aware that you hard-liner liberals have a difficult time using statistics and logic when it comes to the second amendment. I understand that your position is due to the historical inability of liberals to comprehend facts about crime and self-defense. This anti-self-defense position has always irritated me, but I understand it to be a liberal mental problem. Hopefully, your generous taxpayer- funded insurance plans will cover your debilitating psychiatric deficiency.

However, as a government and economics teacher, you have thoroughly confused me, Dianne. You see, I was under the impression that my job was to teach students about the Constitution and the Bill of Rights so that they can become smart, productive citizens. I thought that you were a Democrat and thus, take the position to strongly defend the First Amendment for everyone (but Christians). So what’s going on with all this NSA garbage you keep spewing?   I recently read that you would not support protecting the First Amendment rights of someone like me,  at, or those of my lesser-achieving students who chooses to voice their opinion because we are not  “salaried agents” at a large media company like CNN, CNBC, or FOX.

There has been some debate amongst you liberals. Charles Schumer, must be slightly more liberal as he thinks some bloggers should be protected but not all:

The Senate Free Flow of Information Act of 2013 would establish a national “shield law” that would give journalists protection from testifying in situations when investigators want the sources of confidential information used in media reports.

However, in today’s world, the definition of the word “journalist” means different things to different people, and two powerful Senators, Dianne Feinstein and Richard Durbin, say journalists only should enjoy extended First Amendment protection if they work for traditional media outlets on a paid basis.

The Free Flow of Information Act was introduced earlier this year by Senator Charles Schumer, who had introduced a similar bill in 2009 with the late Senator Arlen Specter. Back then, Feinstein and Durbin wanted strict definitions of the word “journalists” after the WikiLeaks story broke.

Their current amendment to the bill poses the same questions.

“This bill is described as a reporter shield law — I believe it should be applied to real reporters,” Feinstein said last week. “The current version of the bill would grant a special privilege to people who aren’t really reporters at all, who have no professional qualifications.”

The Feinstein-Durbin proposed amendment would narrowly define journalists as “a salaried agent” of a media company.

Feinstein also reportedly said that the bill shouldn’t apply to WikiLeaks or “a 17-year-old who drops out of high school, buys a website for $5 and starts a blog.”

Schumer’s bill has a much-broader definition and he believes the language is specific enough to include bloggers and unpaid contributors, and exclude WikiLeaks.

“The world has changed. We’re very careful in this bill to distinguish journalists from those who shouldn’t be protected, WikiLeaks and all those, and we’ve ensured that,” Schumer said. “But there are people who write and do real journalism, in different ways than we’re used to. They should not be excluded from this bill.”

Dianne, are you OK? Seriously, I am worried about your mental health. I know you are  currently the oldest serving Senator and I think the liberal mental disease is getting worse. Are you really afraid of a 17- year old dropout blogging ? Are you really worried that the many public school teachers who run blogs are actually terrorists in disguise? Despite that the 17 year old dropout has a better chance of reporting real news than the puppets on any mainstream news channel I can’t imagine you would be willing to sacrifice our First Amendment rights over baseless fear. Censorship is liberal no-no land. Remember?

Despite the fear people have about crazed Congresswomen  cracking down on free-speech, I cannot help but smirk as I know you are desperately trying to keep the dinosaur propagandists and liars in power at a time when the technological landscape is dramatically changing. I think its wonderful that you government leeches are beginning to fear the “common man” again. It’s cute to see you guys try to control the marketplace of ideas.  Remember the Gutenberg printing press and the revolution of ideas that followed? It’s coming and you cannot stop it so please stop trying.  The free-market is a beautiful thing and in the long-run it will always win, ALWAYS.

Seriously Dianne, please get some help. If you are mind-controlled, I will pray for your free-will and if you are simply a treasonous witch I pray for the people’s enlightenment. Either way, I cannot let a bunch of old crazies with historically low popular support  scare me into shutting up and neither should you, dear readers. Dianne,  people like you give me plenty of ammunition (hehe) to write. Maybe you should censor yourself to shut the rest of us up.


Best wishes,

Mrs. Yurkovitch


PS. Why don’t you simply pull a Pelosi and scare Congress into signing a censorship bill before they know what’s in it. Ahh, San Fransisco- you sure know how to pick them!



4 thoughts on “Madam Feinstein, I’m slightly concerned for your mental health.”

Order by: Newest | Oldest | Top
  1. Anna Xu says:

    First off, in my opinion, a journalist is anyone who tries to communicate a message to an audience.

    I once happened upon a layman’s analogy, which I think will fit aptly into this situation: “A YouTuber isn’t a YouTuber just because they have two or three videos on a YouTube channel where they don’t even talk to the audience.” Just like how having a few videos on YouTube doesn’t make you a “YouTuber”, having a few articles or vlogs on the internet doesn’t make you a journalist. Unless you stimulate the audience, unless you attempt to convey a message to someone at the other end of the screen you cannot be considered as someone who reports findings to others. In other words, a journalist can be anyone as long as they have a dedication to the art and are willing to impress their opinions upon others; one can only be denied the status of “journalist” when he/she meets neither requirement.

    Back to the article. I obviously do not agree with Dianne Feinstein’s definition of a journalist. And, I certainly do not agree with her proposed changes to the Free Flow of Information Act: to restrict protection enumerated under the First Amendment only to professional journalists working under major news reporting corporations. These changes, in effect, would give professional reporters the right to refuse testimony while automatically forcing all “amateur” journalists to fess up. This just seems wrong to me. Though many writers, vloggers, bloggers, etc. are some of the smartest people you can ever meet, I doubt that the average online media user has any clue of what they would say in a real trial. I know that Dianne is probably just trying to prevent another Wikileaks crisis from happening, but that doesn’t give her the right to take away the people’s voice. Bloggers should keep on blogging, vloggers keep on vlogging, and Tumblrers keep on Tumblring.

    1. saigonchick92 says:

      I agree about your definition of “youtuber” however, I always thought we all enjoyed the first amendment protections, not journalists only.

  2. Abby Hawthorne says:

    I love your comment about the free market economy, that in the end, the free market system will always work! In an economic sense, Senator Feinstein is trying to create a “command economy” of journalistic power…only the propagandists of the knowledge she wishes to promote are allowed their free speech. This is eerily similar to the characters in Orwell’s Animal Farm–Squealer was the pig who sleazily talked (err, squealed) his way into the minds of the other animals on the farm, and he only promoted Napoleon’s propaganda. I’ve never read 1984, but Orwell is probably right on the money in that society, too. Creepy.

    1. saigonchick92 says:

      Oh yes, George Orwell is awesome. I am a huge fan. You’re right about Feinstein- she’s pretty ridiculous in my book. I will be posting some George Orwell inspired drawings soon so stay posted :)

Leave a Reply

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

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>