Earlier this week the San Francisco city council held a vote to pass a resolution denouncing a nationside radio talk show host who is based out of San Francisco (David Savage) because of comments he has made about immigration. In order for the resolution to pass it had to be unanamous. The vote was 9-1. The guy voting against the resolution said he didn't agree with what Mr. Savage said but he did support his right to say it.
Are the liberals in San Francisco trying to outlaw Freedom of Speech?
2007-08-15 04:49:35 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Civic Participation
Before you jump all over me, I realize I mis-spelled amendment.
2007-08-15 04:54:42 · update #1
Actually Mr. X----one of the board of supervisors is putting togeather a protest of Mexican to be held on the steps of his office building. Mr. Savage is asking the Immigration Service to bring buses in, ID the protesters, and arrest and deport any illegals that may be in the group.
2007-08-15 09:18:41 · update #2
It's not just the liberals in California, it's all of them and yes they want to outlaw freedom of speech.
If you disagree with them, then you should be silenced, which is funny because they're the ones usually crying about "tolerance" and "diversity".
I guess, as long as you agree, then say what you like. Step out of line, though, and you're a vile racist hater who should be muzzled. Hypocritical, to be sure.
2007-08-15 04:59:01 · answer #1 · answered by Common_Sense_is_Uncommon 4 · 3⤊ 2⤋
San Francisco is like any other city, the people living there have a wide variety of political views ranging from extremely "liberal" to extremely "conservative". San Francisco's reputation is built on the basis of the Beatniks of the 1950s and the Summer of Love of the Sixties. It has an extremely vocal and liberal mayor in Gavin Newsom but it is also home to conservative radio host Michael Savage. If you want or need to live in the San Francisco Bay Area but rather not live in San Francisco proper, there are more conservative cities in the area including South San Francisco, San Jose, Dublin-Pleastanton, San Leandro, Alameda, or Hayward. There are 3 million people living in the Bay Area and they don't all fit the Berkeley/San Francisco liberal stereotype.
2016-05-18 03:55:07 · answer #2 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I consider myself a liberal but I agree with the 1 guy who voted against denouncing the radio guy. Even if I don't agree with someone I still believe they have the right to say it. The only time speech should be censored is when it is intended to cause a public disturbance or riot. I can't judge whether or not David Savage crossed that line since I haven't heard what he said.
2007-08-15 05:00:04 · answer #3 · answered by luckythirteen 6 · 5⤊ 0⤋
This post is in reply to Charity G."First does not apply to corporate enterprise"
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.
Where does this say that it does not apply to a Corperate Enterprise? Especially since this enterprise is someone who makes a living expressing his opinion!!!
2007-08-15 05:18:22 · answer #4 · answered by Coasty 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
I don't think that any is against the First Amendment, but many people feel their speech is more important than others.
I don't care for Savage's show or his attitude, so I just don't listen to him.
However, there are people on the left and the right who feel that only their views should be heard.
"Free speech is a restraint on government, not an incitement to the citizen." - Dean Acheson
2007-08-15 05:12:23 · answer #5 · answered by wichitaor1 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I'm just happy that no one has tried to shut down dissent over the Iraq war, in the last few years.
That would be awful, wouldn't it?
I'm proud of the way that the Republicans have encouraged/welcomed debate and questioning of G. Dubya's policies, over the past six years.
Yes, the GOP is the standard bearer, in the cause of Free Speech.
(Can you detect any sarcasm, here? Any sarcasm at all? Maybe just a tad?)
2007-08-15 08:43:57 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
The Liberals are the only ones standing up for our rights! The reason Michael Savage should not be given a platform is because he preaches hatred, We outlaw hate crimes and his show is just a platform for hatred.
If you knew there was an error, why not take the time to fix it! Must be a Conservative thing, screw things up (Iraq) then just ignore it and maybe it will go away or repair itself.
2007-08-15 08:50:02 · answer #7 · answered by B. D Mac 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋
so a radio host speaks, and the city council speaks, and somehow you think someone is trying to outlaw freedom of speech? did they vote to put a muzzle on him? to ban his show from the radio in SF? you people are hilarious.
2007-08-15 07:19:04 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Sorry - First does not apply to corporate enterprise. However, if Savage had said this as a regular joe on the street and received some sort of punishment from the city, then yes the city would be in violation.
2007-08-15 04:56:37 · answer #9 · answered by CHARITY G 7 · 0⤊ 4⤋
Well my favorite comedian said it perfect (George Carlin) A minister didnt like what he said on the radio and he took it to court and won. Carlin say well minister their are 2 nobs on the radio (like 20 years ago lol) one to turn it off and one to lower the volume OMG its called freedom of choice if u dont like you dont have to listen to it OMG
2007-08-15 05:09:44 · answer #10 · answered by Mike G 2 · 4⤊ 0⤋