In a recent speech, the former Speaker of the House demonstrated such an amazing ignorance of our system of laws as to make this writer want to cry. He pontificated on the need for reexamine free speech in the light of terrorism, and went on to say: "a different set of rules" may be needed in order to interfere with terrorists' ability to use the Internet and recruit others.

You'd think after all those years in Washington, he would know the difference between, the rights of the citizens under the Constitutions, and legislation. Maybe not. Maybe power is so addictive it warps the brain, and disables the ability to actually think before you speak. I know he is not going to read this but lets pretend I've tied him to a chair and I am not only speaking to him in simple sentences, but also writing the whole thing out in big letters on the blackboard (maybe that's it, folks, when people get elected to congress they have to every year take courses in continuing education (like doctors) about civics and other fundamental ideas about our form of government. If they can't pass the course, they have to go home - and we get to determine the test).

Okay Newt, civics 101. We are a democratic constitutional Republic. That means the power is in the people, and what power government has is a limited grant of that power, which can be withdrawn at our will. Part of the limits on what you can do in the Legislative Branch is called the Bill of Rights. You can't change those rules without changing the Constitution (which changes we get to approve). So a reexamination of free speech for the purpose of making up a different set of rules does not exist as a power you get to exercise. Now please go to the blackboard in the back of the class and write this over and over again 100 times.