Apparently, we can't talk enough about the First Amendment and what it means. Because according to the annual Constitution Day Civics Survey, over one-third of Americans cannot name a single one of our First Amendment rights. People that don't know their most fundamental rights are asking to be taken advantage of. And that's what is happening right now in the People's Republic of California.

The California state senate is considering a bill that would create a government "fake news" advisory group to supervise information posted and spread on social media. This group would develop criteria for what is considered fake news, then create a plan to fix the problem.

RELATED: Forget fake news, HERE is a fake feminist

Here's why we have to talk about the First Amendment, early and often – because a giant state in our union is about to create a special government censorship "advisory" group and most people won't bat an eyelash. Even worse, a lot of Californians will nod and applaud the effort.

Fake news may be annoying, and both the Right and the Left generate plenty of it, but the very last thing any American should want is the government giving thumbs up or down on what can be considered legitimate news. Besides that, censorship like this would be against the law. The Left hates to hear this, but for now at least, the Bill of Rights remains law. And that means you have a right to say and publish what you believe, even if it's made up news, and even if it's about the government.

We can survive fake news, but we cannot survive the shredding of the First Amendment.

George Hay was a U.S. District Court Judge in Virginia in the early 1800s. He knew and served alongside many of the Founding Fathers. Hay was a passionate defender of the Bill of Rights, especially the First Amendment. In 1799, he published An Essay on the Liberty of the Press. With insane things happening like California's fake news advisory board, it's worth revisiting Hay's essay, because he gets it. He writes:

It is obvious in itself, and it is admitted by all men, that freedom of speech means the power uncontrolled by law, of speaking either truth or falsehood at the discretion of the individual, provided no other individual be injured. This power is, as yet, in its full extent in the United States. A man may say every thing which his passions suggest; he may employ all his time, and all his talents, if he is wicked enough, to do so in speaking against the government matters that are false, scandalous, and malicious... [and yet he should be] safe within the sanctuary of the press… [even if he] condemns the principle of republican institutions... censures the measures of our government… even if he ascribes to them [meaning government officials] measures and acts, which never had existence; thus violating at once, every principle of decency and truth…

He may endeavor to corrupt mankind, not only by opinions that are erroneous, but by facts which are false. Still however he will be safe, because he lives in a country where religious freedom is established. If then freedom of religion, will not permit a man to be punished, for publishing any opinions on religious topics, and supporting those opinions by false facts, surely freedom of the press, which is the medium of all publications, will not permit a man to be punished, for publishing any opinion on any subject, and supporting it by any opinion whatever.

We can survive fake news, but we cannot survive the shredding of the First Amendment.

For some reason, people are still protesting President Trump's now-repealed immigration policy. Every day, we get a fresh example of outrage that is dubious or unsavory or sometimes even violent.

There was the graphic cartoon by Occupy Wall Street, the abuse of Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi as she left a theater, where she'd been watching Won't You Be My Neighbor, the similar abuse of Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen, the mistreatment of Sarah Sanders (boy, for a group that calls itself feminist, progressives sure do mistreat a lot of women), and the bungled Time magazine cover story, which saw the magazine use a photo of an immigrant girl being kidnapped from her parents, all of which turned out to be false.

The girl had never been taken from her mother. That didn't matter, though, Time magazine concluded, it was the message that counts.

RELATED: No justice, no sleep: The progressive protests never rest

Oddly enough, a similar incident happened today, when Alexis Ren, Maxim's Mexico cover girl in 2017, a Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Rookie for 2018, posted an image of a sobbing child reaching through a chain leak fence.

"I'm f---ing disgusted right now," Ren wrote. The assumption is that she'd posted evidence of children being taken from their parents at the US border. It wasn't until after the tweet went viral that people realized the photo had nothing to do with the current border situation. Not even close. The photo was actually taken last year, for a Metro UK article titled "Thousands of children separated from parents during battle to free Mosul from ISIS."

She's a Sports Illustrated model. Who cares what she has to say?

She's a Sports Illustrated model. Who cares what she has to say? Well, strange as it is, her tweets can have a real-world effect that is both divisive and precarious. Before Ren deleted the tweet, it had garnered 16,300 retweets and 50,300 likes. With roughly 12.2 million followers on Instagram and 1.5 million followers in Twitter, Ren has the ability to spread a false message, to influence public opinion.

Fake news, I believe it's called.

At this point, nasty rhetoric from Hollywood elite has become so multitudinous that even bringing it up feels like looking into two mirrors facing each other, the endless line of reflections like incidents and tantrums. Over the course of Donald Trump's presidency, we've seen our fair share of petty — at times violent — outbursts. Kathy Griffin, Roberto De Niro, Samantha Bee, Seth Rogen, all the same celebrities who fawned over Obama.

So it's nice to hear calm-headed proclamations like the one Home Improvement star Zachary Ty Bryan gave during an interview with Fox News. Bryan, who considers himself "conservative libertarian," criticized Hollywood elites who have come down with nasty cases of Trump Derangement Syndrome.

RELATED: De Niro at da Tony's gets obscenely polictical

"They have no message," Bryan said. "If your message is, 'Hate Trump,' you're really not getting very far with your agenda and what you're trying to accomplish."

When asked about the elitism in Hollywood, Bryan spoke about Seth Rogen's recent snub of House Speaker Paul Ryan.

One thing that really sticks out about the interview is that Bryan is able to criticize Hollywood elites while also providing an answer.

One thing that really sticks out about the interview is that Bryan is able to criticize Hollywood elites while also providing an answer. He uses the term solution-focused, he talks about using dialogue to mend our differences:

He had this opportunity to have some dialogue with Paul Ryan, maybe express his disagreements, maybe influence him on some level and maybe they could have worked together to help the problems that he has.

There's a lot of wisdom in these words. He adds that free speech is not the issue. Divisive rhetoric is the issue. Now is the time for mending. For solutions.