Shut up, they explained. The Corner: "Rice Withdraws from Rutgers Commencement"
Meanwhile, here in the Happy Valley: "Former Attorney General John Ashcroft meets hostile crowd at UMass Amherst."
"I disapprove of what you say, so get lost." - fake Voltaire.
8 comments:
It's a crying shame that the loser of "Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition" and "Ashcroft v. ACLU" and the man who said that vocal opponents of the Bush administration were "aid[ing] terrorists” didn't get the full opportunity to speak that he so clearly supports.
Rule #1:
When Republicans do something "bad", castigate them for it.
When Democrats do something "bad", castigate Republicans for it.
"I'm rubber, you're glue." That is a powerful, powerful comeback from the side that equates a group of campus protesters with the rhetorical and legal heft of the U.S. Attorney General's office.
Strike that. The protesters are way more dangerous.
I urge readers to judge the details of the case "Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition" to see how this evil man was trying to shut down First Amendment rights:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashcroft_v._Free_Speech_Coalition
Hey, how's that Constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United coming along?
Maybe Ashcroft could have addressed these questions if he had the opportunity. But no because shut up, said the Reality-Based Community.
So in other words:
Several dozens of people yelling "war criminal" and booing
= a dangerous infringement of free speech
The Supreme Court refusing to add exceptions to the First Amendment
= a dangerous endorsement of free speech
Fortunately for you, it is your First Amendment privilege to hold those two ideas in conjunction with one another.
When a position is too far right for Clarence Thomas to support, that's when you know you've struck gold.
Hey, how's that Constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United coming along?
Ho, that's hilarious, especially since current conservative intellectualism is pushing enough pipe dream amendments to build a church organ.
Ari Fleisher responding to a Republican Congressman in the wake of 9/11 that "Americans that they need to watch what they say, watch what they do. This is not a time for remarks like that; there never is" = the death of liberty
Arresting and frog-marching the YouTube guy who caused the deadly Benghazi movie review = enlightened sensitivity to other cultures
Message delivered.
http://www.kansascity.com/2014/05/03/4999422/the-inconsistent-liberal-defense.html#storylink=cpy
Indeed. There is situational inconsistency within a population comprising half the United States, based on two examples of very different scope and circumstance. I’m not sure how that deflects the observations about you specifically, a single person who expresses disproportionate and asymmetric views about one subject. The good news is that Ashcroft and Fleischer are both has-beens, so you can keep on thinking whatever you like and be in the clear.
You’re not the only one, of course. There’s also your cited backup, Jonah Goldberg. In the same column where he knocks “the inconsistent liberal defense of free speech,” Goldberg writes:
”At the time, I largely agreed with then-Attorney General John Ashcroft, who said: “To those … who scare peace-loving people with phantoms of lost liberty, my message is this: Your tactics only aid terrorists.”
But in retrospect, I have a bit more sympathy with those self-anointed defenders of free speech.”
What a brave journey for the man who previously wrote the column “Flip-flopping defines Democrats.” I wonder what might have changed Jonah Goldberg’s thought process? Deep introspection? Long weekends thumbing through the wisdom of Edmund Burke? It’s amazing how much fresh perspective can be gained on one's bedrock principles, just by losing the White House.
But hey, we’re all inconsistent. I know it’s wrong to bully or drown out speakers. It shouldn’t happen. But it’s damn funny when it happens to a free speech bonehead like John Ashcroft.
Post a Comment