Okay, America, it's time to have a talk about free speech. Don Imus said something incredibly stupid and has been apologizing more than Trent Lott at the Apollo. He lost his sponsors and now his job. But that just isn't enough for some people.
Enter Al Sharpton. Even though he had Imus appear on his radio show and apologize, even though he berated Imus throughout, Sharpton wants more. Read this and be very scared.
It is our feeling that this is only the beginning. We must have a broad discussion on what is permitted and not permitted in terms of the airwaves.
Apparently, Sharpton's never heard of the FCC...
Then, there's Keith Olbermann. With no apparent sense of irony, Olbermann came up with a list of others he would like to see kicked off the air, including people like Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, and Neal Boortz. Hmmm...seems to be a pattern there.
In both cases, I'm sure there are a lot of "progressives" and self-styled liberals who are nodding in agreement with the two of them. After all, to them, Limbaugh, Beck, Boortz, and others are all hatemongers who spew conservative venom, poisoning the minds of their sheeplike followers. But they're overlooking something.
The Law Of Unintended Consequences.
If these nozzleheads get what they want, they open themselves up to the same thing being done to them when they're out of power. Of course, when it happens to them, they'll scream "free speech" and wrap themselves in the Constitution. Well, let me tell you something, Al and Keith, you are fairweather friends of the Constitution. When it suits your needs, you will defend it with every fiber of your pathetic beings...or you'll pretend it's like a wisp of smoke.
Like the smoke from a book burning.
Get it yet, guys? You can't pick and choose who gets free speech. If you want it, you have to allow it for those who you disagree with. Protecting the speech you like doesn't make you a patriot. It makes you part of the problem, and it makes you liars when you say you defend free speech.
On the other hand, there are people out there who defend Imus's right to say completely stupid stuff and the rights of those who want to call him out on it. You don't fight bad speech with censorship. You fight it with good speech.
And that doesn't happen when one side is allowed to gag the other.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Good thing he only disparaged young black women. Had he said he was embarrassed the president from Texas, well then let the death threats begin.
No one's freedom of speech was damaged here; Imus can spew all the racial and misogynistic slurs he wants. He does not, however, have the right to expect to be paid for it.
Anonymous said...
Good thing he only disparaged young black women. Had he said he was embarrassed the president from Texas, well then let the death threats begin.
And death threats aren't free speech. Of course, Ms. Maines didn't lose her right to speak, no matter what she and her ideological pals say. However, if Sharpton and Olbermann get their way, others who oppose Ms. Maines and her ideological pals will.
No one's freedom of speech was damaged here; Imus can spew all the racial and misogynistic slurs he wants. He does not, however, have the right to expect to be paid for it.
I didn't say it was. What I said was that the Imus situation lead to Sharpton and Olbermann making a direct threat to free speech based solely on their biases. That's not an environment conducive to free speech for anyone and will lead to censorship by both sides if Sharpton and Olbermann get their way.
And that's scary, regardless of where you fall on the Imus situation.
Post a Comment