It's funny that when someone heckles Barbara Streisand's mocking of our president she tells them to "Shut the F**k up!" and gets applauded for it.
Streisand is supposed to exercize free speech without being heckled,right? However when Ann Coulter excercises her free speech at a college, she almost, literally got a pie in the face. When the minutemen spoke at Columbia University, the speaker not only got heckled and interrupted, but the students actually rushed the stage and stopped his speech, with little help or intervention from police or security. So speech is only free, without intimidation if the liberals approve of it? This is wrong.
What's your view?
2006-10-11 08:37:25 · 20 answers · asked by chuck3011 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Conservatives are scum bags.
That's the long and short of it. No need to debate it.
That is why the conservatives made death threats against the Dixie Chicks. That is what they call free speech.
Conservatives are total hypocrites. They only want free speech for speech that is in lock-step agreement with their agenda. Take a look on any college campus. They pay lip-service to 'diversity' but shout down any non-Marxist viewpoint. They steal conservative newspapers routinely. They throw pies and intimidate guest speakers who happen to NOT be Stalinists.
No one seriously believes that Conservatives actually care about free speech. They proved otherwise long ago.
2006-10-11 08:57:44 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
To a liberal freedom of speech means the right to say anything they agree with.
Freedom of speech also entails the right to shut down any form of communications that they do not agree with.
A few examples of this behavior, the Colombia incident, the Coultier issue, and the Streisand fiasco, I could sit here and fill pages of like incidents. The biggest issue involving freedom of speech that alarms me is The Fairness Doctrine. This was an old policy that completely restricts freedom of speech on the radio. If you make a political statement, you must allow the opposition equal time to respond. Sounds good but it makes political speech not commercially viable. The radio stations are businesses and you know that is no way to operate a business. The real intent of the doctrine is to shut down those who are critical of Liberal dogma. Talk radio being the chief culprits.
So despite my issues with the Republicans on the border and on spending, I am still going to vote and vote Republican. If we do not we will lose what is our only voice of opposition.
It does bring me joy to know that Coultiers attackers were treated to a broken arms and jaws. It is getting to where it is not safe to assault a 5 "2" women
2006-10-11 08:48:19 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
The difference is Barbara was expressing an opinion. Ann Coulter is just a liar, therefore more people are going to react. Yes, she has been caught lying and elaborating many times. That is a huge difference in my opinion. It's kind of like saying to someone "shut the f*** up" or instead saying "he has a STD!" Bad analogy but you catch my drift. You can't use Ann Coulter in any examples. She makes even Republicans look bad. And I am a Liberal! I feel sorry that she represents their party in such a negative way.
2006-10-11 10:17:35 · answer #3 · answered by bornalib 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Liberals are total hypocrites. They only want free speech for speech that is in lock-step agreement with their agenda. Take a look on any college campus. They pay lip-service to 'diversity' but shout down any non-Marxist viewpoint. They steal conservative newspapers routinely. They throw pies and intimidate guest speakers who happen to NOT be Stalinists.
No one seriously believes that liberals actually care about free speech. They proved otherwise long ago.
2006-10-11 08:43:31 · answer #4 · answered by college_republicans_club 2 · 1⤊ 2⤋
No, you do not have the right to free speech without being open to criticism. Those who criticize have just as much right to speak as anyone else.
We do not, however, have the right to physically assault someone (pie or rushing a stage).
But, speech can be limited on private property.
2006-10-11 08:42:10 · answer #5 · answered by Phoenix, Wise Guru 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
There certainly appear to be double standards for liberals and conservatives.
Imagine the outrage if Streisand had taken a pie in the face!!
2006-10-11 08:43:02 · answer #6 · answered by Sean 7 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Same situation with Bill Maher.
He made a comment about 9/11 and terroists on a show called Politcally Incorrect, and then got fired for doing his job.
2006-10-11 08:41:47 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
Babs simply demonstrated the gutter quality of human being that she has always been, but gotten away with like most celebrities due to their talent in some unrelated area of life.
Freedom of speech these days seems to mean (to either side): If you agree with me, you get to say what you want no matter how coarse or inappropriate; if you don't, you are some sort of "-ist" or close-minded and shouldn't be allowed to spread hate and lies.
2006-10-11 08:43:02 · answer #8 · answered by kingstubborn 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Liberals think free speech is the freedom to agree with them.
2006-10-19 06:53:10 · answer #9 · answered by yupchagee 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That is tough. The usually set their definitions for Freedom of Speech, what constitutes racism, what counts for environmentalism, and what it means to be patriotic. The only thing you can do is point out their inconsistencies as you just did.
2006-10-11 08:45:32 · answer #10 · answered by scorpio 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋