Shouldn’t every Liberal and ACLU member get behind Imus to protect freedom of speech?

Question

If you don’t like what he said then turn off the radio.

Answer 1

Yes, he has exercised his right of free speech. His employers and sponsors, whose contracts with Imus are at-will, meaning they can end the contracts at will, have exercised their rights as employers and sponsors NOT to employ him after what he said. Theres nothing illegal there.

NOW, if the FBI crashes down Imus' door and hauls him off to federal prison for saying what he said, now we have a problem, and the Libs and the ACLU would be all over that. That is a violation of Free Speech guaranteed under the First Amendment.

Do you see the difference between a private company terminating an employee for what they said and the government arresting someone for what they said.

There is a HUGE difference between the two, and i hope you can see that.

Answer 2

The ACLU fights against government attempts to violate the Constitution. CBS and NBC have no constitutional obligation to continue to give Imus a forum--they are the bosses, they can hire and fire as they see fit.

The ACLU is not involved because there's nothing for them to be involved in.

As far as Imus goes, I think firing him was too harsh, and was pandering to certain groups. However freedom of speech this ain't.

Answer 3

He has freedom of speech. He can say the exact same things he's been saying somewhere else. But when he was on the air, he was working for CBS and MSNBC and they have the right to fire him because they pay him. Almost all of the sponsors of his show declined to advertise with him anymore and CBS and MSNBC are not non-profit organizations. If you worked for someone, and you said or did something that your boss disapproved of, don't you think your boss would have the right to fire you? He still has free speech. It's easy to spout hatred and insults when you are hiding behind a microphone...I wonder if he would say these things in front of an audience made up of blacks and Jews.

Answer 4

I don't think that it's a matter of being liberal or being with the ACLU. I think that any American that believes in the their God given right to speak their mind should back Imus. This is all political bullshit. The Constitution never said that a person has to be "politicaly correct". This political correctness is in place so you are discouraged from speaking what is really on your mind. So you don't hurt the feelings of others if you speak the truth as yousee it. I personally think that this "political correctness" is in place just to apease the minorities or who ever feels slighted by your opinion. Like I said before, the Constitution has been bastardized to the point of not being recognized. Your rights are either watered down or constrained in some way or adjusted to apease those who would not have you speak your mind.

Answer 5

There is no legal issue here, so there's nothing for the ACLU to be involved in. It's between him and his employer. If the government were trying to censor him, there would be something to it.

Half of the right-wingers on Answers are so completely uninformed that they don't even understand this simple principle. The other know it but they're manipulating the first half to score cheap points. Too bad your fun was spoiled.

As for turning off the radio instead of listening to Imus, I did that a long long time ago. I can't imagine why anyone listened.

Answer 6

Why do such assorted of you sense that he replaced into denied his freedom of speech. The FCC is a federally operated business enterprise we as tax payers have a ideal to whinge to.because of the fact of this it is not a freedom of speech concern. enable me provide you a assessment: A family contributors of 5 (mom and four toddlers) gets federal suggestions and he or she abuses that very suggestions that we as tax payers have adequate money her, could the government after it gets assorted lawsuits not positioned tension on the social provider place of work in her city to look at and terminate any help that taxpayers are affording her. the smart answer is constrained. that's what CBS and Ms-NBC did the spoke back to the strain of sponsors, picketers and extremely possibly the FCC. the only venue that Jesse and Al have is that given them by using The very entities spoken of earlier among others. You adult adult males consistently choose to characteristic those 2 to the plight of all black human beings. They weren't elected as "Black united statesa.'s" president and vice-president. while you're/have been ever indignant by using statements that they made consistent with probability you are able to detect a media talk board that addresses you plight. till then won't be able to we end pointing palms and handle the topics as a collective and cohesive unit? From what i'm examining from a number of your comments that question is previous your comprehension so which you will dismiss.

Answer 7

Why? His First Amendment Rights were not violated. He was not silenced on behalf of the government, he lost support and got fired by businesses, not the government.

"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 the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

Time to read the Bill of Rights again.

Answer 8

I'm with you on this one, but the ACLU is only interested in protecting the civil rights of minorities and Imus is a middle aged white dude.

Answer 9

Are you kidding???The ACLU wouldn't touch this with a ten foot pole!!!! It's simply not radical enough & also, being more of a racial issue, they would be totally at odds with Sharpton, Jackson and the entire African American Community if they appeared to be defending Imus.....not a situation that would look good for the ACLU, who is always watching out for their own, left-wing, Communist agenda & prefers to protect the "rights" of crimminals, degenerates and losers!

Answer 10

My guess is that you have no idea what the ACLU's priorities actually are. I also guess that you probably only get your news from drudge and Faux News.

Btw, there is this little thing called the U.S. Attorney scandal going on. The circumstantial evidence is showing that this is potentially bigger than watergate. Innocent people going to jail and guilty ones going free. But you wouldn't know this because drudge and faux news will not mention it. They forget to mention anything that doesn't fit neatly into their anyone who questions Bush is evil/anyone for Bush is good morality.