Free Speech Isn't Free

Free Speech Isn't Free
Chron Watch ^| 20 July 2004 | Roger Burdick





The First Amendment of the Constitution states, ''Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or of the right of people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.'' That's a lot of important words packed into a very small paragraph, but Iâ??ll only comment on free speech and the free press.

Before you take free speech at face value, understand that there is no freedom to say anything you want to say. One traditional argument is that you canâ??t yell, ''FIRE!'' in a crowded theater as it may start a panic and kill people. Likewise, good luck to you if you think you can stand in front of a mixed group of people and use racial slurs in every context. At the very least, you will be called a bigot and racist. At the worst you may not make it out of the room alive. For all practical purposes there is a limited amount of things that arenâ??t considered free speech.

A couple of weeks ago, Whoopi Goldberg appeared at a Democrat fundraiser, and by all accounts she was less than friendly to President Bush and also used foul language. Whoopi was a spokesperson for Slim-Fast Corporation in commercials and as word of her actions spread, people were less than appreciative of her actions. In exercizing their right to free speech, people complained so loudly that Whoopi got fired.

Democrats want you to believe that free speech is okay and shouldnâ??t be condemned, with the caveat that you must agree with them. This is the same group that canâ??t say ''illegal'' and ''immigrant'' in the same sentence but has no problem calling George Bush a war criminal and comparing him to Hitler.

A fair two-way street to me is that an individual is responsible for the free speech he or she makes. However, Whoopi claims that her right to freedom of speech was violated in getting fired from Slim-Fast. This is typical of Democrats. They want the freedom of speech, but they donâ??t want the responsibility that goes along with it. Anytime a Democrat says something under the freedom of speech clause, he or she expects a free ride on any issues that come about because of what was said.

Arnold Schwarzenegger this past weekend called the politicians in Sacramento ''girlie-men'' and some Democrats are reportedly upset. Of course, they said it was bigoted (the ultimate trump card they always play) and homophobic, but none of them ever wrote to Saturday Night Live and complained about the original skit this phrase came from. They are only complaining because it was said by a Republican with which they disagree. The level of freedom of speech leftists grant to conservatives is minimal, yet they allow Democrats wide latitude with smears, lies, and despicable characterizations of Republicans.

The only reason that Democrats are even mentioning the Schwarzenegger adjective is because it works. The only way to stop Schwarzenegger is to pressure him with politically correct censorship. It isnâ??t the Republicans censoring Whoopi; it is the California Democrats trying to make Schwarzenegger less effective by censoring his speeches.

The First Amendment also allows freedom of the press. But that doesnâ??t keep the liberal media from choosing sides. It is the ''buyer beware'' caveat when it comes to listening to a newscast or reading a major newspaper. I wrote in a column last year that Joe Wilson was a lousy detective and wasnâ??t to be trusted. He sat around for eight days drinking sweet mint tea and talking to dozens of officials, and got nowhere. Democrats loved him until last week when he was proved to be a liar. The original stories about Joe Wilson ran on Page One. The follow-ups proving him to be a liar either got buried or didnâ??t make it to the correction stage. Freedom of the press is what we have, and many people of the press have chosen sides with the Democrats.

The news account of Goldbergâ??s firing from Slim-Fast: http://www.nydailynews.com/front/v-pfriendly/story/212784p-183225c.html

The Unilever-Slim-Fast Lipton Tea Party

http://www.acmewebpages.com/whoopi/

Whoopi Goldberg said "Anyone who would wave to Stevie Wonder is not fully there" and "We need to keep bush where it belongs and not in the White House." She also struck an unexpectedly nonpartisan note when she said Nancy Reagan was the last White House occupant who "really looked good." She said concert organizers had asked to see her material beforehand but "I Xeroxed my behind and I folded it up in an envelope and I sent it back with a big kiss mark on it because we`re Democrats â?? we`re not afraid to laugh." "Why are you asking me to come if you don't want me to be me?"

How can liberals be trumpeting free speech and political correctness at the same time? They want to have their cake and eat it! I assume they think that it is only ethnic minorities who have feelings, and need to be wrapped in cotton wool and have any kind of remark, no matter how innocent, censored in case the poor lambs get upset. Meanwhile, white people are fair game. Go ahead, take a shot. Well, it's their own fault all this racism exists, they started it by expanding their silly little empires, didn't they?

The truth is most white people do not get offended in the same way that 'minorities' do. We have a little thing called a sense of humour!

It's not a black and white thing man, it's a get a rope type thing. I think we have all seen how nasty that can be. If ya can't say what you want in private places like this, and ya can't say what you want in public, then I guess we are Free to speak to the walls in our homes. No negitive remarks will be tolerated. The funny thing is that all this negitive crap pointed at whoopie will more then likely open a bunch of new doors for her to make more money then she was. And in turn, the boycott is still in effect on slimfast. Her supporters will now boycott the crap. Things don't always turn out like people think they will.

Toker

I disagree. It's totally a black and white thing. It may not have started out that way, but that's how it always ends up. Comparisons have to be made. The truth is, racism will always exist among all races. But they're only concerned about the racism that offends, ie everything bar white racism. We're supposed to put up with it. But some of our elderley, who are left confused about what they can and can't say in this ever changing world, are being vilified and abused for having old fashioned views.
Meanwhile blacks get up on stage and tell 'jokes' about us that, on the other foot, would definately not be tolerated. Black movies, full of anti white racism, slip through all the time without raising a murmur.
It's crazy.