Why do liberals seek to limit free speech?

[nostatic]

Jeff, that's a whole other topic

[Shaun @ Tru6]

Originally posted by Jeff Higgins
So liberal college students are that easily manipulated? And their college did not provide the necessary adult supervision? So in other words, a bright, articulate conservative woman just played them like a fiddle and they were too stupid to see it?

yes, and Jeff, in the exact same way that the people who buy her books are too stupid to see that she only says what says to make money.

[aways]

Originally posted by cool_chick
Coulter was not prevented from doing anything. Free speech was in fact alive and well.

She wants to speak in an inflammatory way, she will pay the consequences for her actions.

Free speech is a beautiful thing......

Like it or not, Joe, the hecklers are ALSO demonstrating free speech.

That's the bummer of free speech to some people...they want people like Coulter, the KKK, etc., to be able to speak freely, but they don't want to deal with the consequences of those actions...

Negativity breeds same. Too bad, so sad, but this is not "silencing" nor "stifling"....what you're seeing here is a consequence of one's actions.....

I know, I know, you don't want some people to have "consequences" for their actions, in this situation, consequences for Coulter's hate-speak...but sorry, that's just how life is.

Quite frankly, your comments are absurd.

Coulter was not allowed to speak because of continued disruption by a group of facsists who can't tolerate ideas they don't hold. The hecklers came to the Coulter talk of their own free will. No one FORCED them to go. If they don't like Coulter and her "hate speech", then THEY SHOULDN'T ATTEND THE TALK. Their purpose for attending and heckling was to prevent OTHERS from hearing ideas they don't like. That's fascism, a.k.a modern-day "liberalism".

[Moses]

Originally posted by aways
Quite frankly, your comments are absurd.

Coulter was not allowed to speak because of continued disruption by a group of facsists who can't tolerate ideas they don't hold. The hecklers came to the Coulter talk of their own free will. No one FORCED them to go. If they don't like Coulter and her "hate speech", then THEY SHOULDN'T ATTEND THE TALK. Their purpose for attending and heckling was to prevent OTHERS from hearing ideas they don't like. That's fascism, a.k.a modern-day "liberalism".

No rational persons definition of free speech includes silencing the free speech of others. Cool Chick is a bright lady. I suspect she was just stirring the pot.

[Hugh R]

When I was a liberal college student in the 70's I saw the same thing on the nuclear power issue. The liberals, hippies, radicals, whatever you want to call them would loudly protest, throw pies,etc. at people who were on the stage trying to have an intelligent discussion about nuclear power. To them, being liberal was making sure no one else's voice or opinion was heard.

[aways]

Originally posted by Moses
No rational persons definition of free speech includes silencing the free speech of others.

I Agree. So if she defends her position, we're both in agreement that she's not rational...

[Shaun @ Tru6]

Originally posted by SoCal911SC
Don't most people who pursue professional commentary as a career/profession say what they say to make money?

Or do the liberal ones do it for free?

(How much does Clinton get per speech these days?)

Mainstream media and liberal media don't:
Sell a personal-branded line of men's clothing using their show to market it

Hawk smoke-eating ashtrays, timeshares, sleepnumber beds, etc.

Churn out chotchke after chotchke to make a fast buck.

I didn't look very hard, but I couldn't find anything like the below on CNN.com.

http://shop.ecompanystore.com/foxnews/FOX_shop.asp

This is disgusting. the length and breadth of crap is incredible.

O'Reilly goes on and on about how "Happy Holidays" is a corruption, but what can you buy in the Fox News store? A Fox News Happy Holidays CHRISTMAS ornament.

[Shaun @ Tru6]

Originally posted by SoCal911SC
Umm, Shaun, hate to break this to you, but Coulter does not purport to be Walter Cronkite.

I'm surprise that you, Mr. Entrepreneur, of all people would criticize Coulter for making a good living doing what she does.

I'm sorry, I have given you the wrong impression. On a business level, I applaud Anne. She's smart and knew exactly what she wanted to accomplish by the end of the night on UCONN. Please, look at her speech, of course it would rile the crowd and of course media would pick the story up.

I only criticize Anne in that I think it's sleazy, she contributes nothing to national dialogue on Politics and is one piece of the "divide the Country" puzzle for personal gain. That's my problem with Anne.

Business level: A+

Patriotism level: F

[RANDY P]

Originally posted by nostatic
What the left needs to do is get somebody smart to write a compelling book. Not chest-puffing crap like Coulter's. Although nobody would read it, because it seems all the masses can comsume is chest-puffing crap and hyperbole...

But I still believe what the left needs to do is offer an alternative, not protest the cartoons like Coulter.

Remember Al Franken? Oh wait, you said "smart"

Anyone read "Rush Limbaugh is a big fat liar?" Can you believe someone actually published that? That's not fitting for toilet paper.

I could've done a better job with that book.

rjp

[Shaun @ Tru6]

Originally posted by SoCal911SC
Sleezy?

I guess you think James Carville is sleezy too? He's pretty divisive, too.

She is expressing her opinion on things, for every one of her on the right, there is another on the left. Big deal. It's free speech, and it is not bad for the country.

Although maybe they should all give up their sleezy expression of opinion trades, and instead do something great and patriotic. Like carefully marketing overpriced, overseas made products to the most vulnerable, most susceptible, pre-adult, easily manipulated segment of our population. More marketing of overseas "stuff" and encouragement of "name brand" consumerism to our children, THAT's true patriotism.

yes, Carville is just as sleazy.

LOL! I'd like to agree with you, but then here's a quote from the owner of Pure Girls boutique in Pleasanton.

“I could not be prouder of the response to the Doll Drive! The girls took such care and love selecting dolls and stuffed animals. Some even took the time to clean, style and dress the dolls, and others bought new dolls with their own money.”

Over-priced? I wish, I'd have an order for a GT3 ready in March.

[Superman]

Originally posted by Moses
No rational persons definition of free speech includes silencing the free speech of others. Cool Chick is a bright lady. I suspect she was just stirring the pot.

I don't think so. I agree with her. Not so much the "reap what you sow" thing, although that's true too. What I notice glaringly is that free speech was alive and well on that occasion, for all parties. The students exercized theirs, and that is the problem?

Free speech does not guarantee manners or respect or even maturity, and it does not mean protection for someone's right to be heard by "x" number of people, or to get paid "x" number of dollars for speaking. Coulter was free to speak, and to collect her feel, and get her story in the newspaper, etc. The students were free to vocalize their reaction.

The problem some folks seem to have is I guess they believe the audience should have been less free to speak. Kinda conflicts with the title of the thread, wouldn't you say?

[RallyJon]

Do you honestly believe that the only people who have the right to speak are those who are loud enough to overcome a mob of hecklers? I can't believe you believe that--or maybe you really are from "that" side of unionism, where those with the biggest bats and axehandles prevail.

[Moses]

Originally posted by Superman

The problem some folks seem to have is I guess they believe the audience should have been less free to speak. Kinda conflicts with the title of the thread, wouldn't you say?

The event was billed as a lecture by Ann Coulter, NOT the student audience. This is more than rudeness, it is censorship and repression.

Imagine Republicans organizing a group that will attend every screening of Michael Moores next film and shout throughout the presentation. Is this merely rudeness? Of course not. The people who pay to see Michael Moores film have the same right to see the film as the students had to hear Coulter speak.

[island_dude]

When the right decides to chill free speech it is usually done with batons, rubber bullets, tear gas and water canons. No wimpy pie attacks for them.

[Shaun @ Tru6]

BTW, Anne's speech prolly wasn't free, I'm sure she got some $ for showing up.

Why is it that it is always only the liberals who "vocalize their reactions" in that way? Why is that such a one way street?

Maybe they are too busy out making money?

or maybe they are lazy?

[Shaun @ Tru6]

Originally posted by SoCal911SC

You seem pretty good at marketing, although sometimes it is transparent, like your overly obvious and clumsy attempt to curry sympathy/favor with your "Who should Joesaka's money get donated to" thread.

Sympathy is something I have little need for.

Actions. It's all about actions. Anyone can say anything on this board. All of it, every single word, is meaningless. Judge a man by what he does, not what he says he will do, or wishes he could do.

[aways]

Originally posted by island_dude
When the right decides to chill free speech it is usually done with batons, rubber bullets, tear gas and water canons. No wimpy pie attacks for them.

And do you have an example of this EVER occuring on a college campus in the US when a leftist was speaking? Or is this just another example of baseless, hysterical, paranoid, leftist rhetoric?

[RKC]

That's too easy...Left vs. batons on campus? Sure....

Ole Miss 1962
UC Berkeley 1964
Kent State 1970

How about discrimination against the Right? Sure....
1980's & 1990's just about everywhere other than Dartmouth!

[cool_chick]

Originally posted by aways
Quite frankly, your comments are absurd.

Coulter was not allowed to speak because of continued disruption by a group of facsists who can't tolerate ideas they don't hold. The hecklers came to the Coulter talk of their own free will. No one FORCED them to go. If they don't like Coulter and her "hate speech", then THEY SHOULDN'T ATTEND THE TALK. Their purpose for attending and heckling was to prevent OTHERS from hearing ideas they don't like. That's fascism, a.k.a modern-day "liberalism".

Quite frankly, it is your comments that are absurd. She was not withheld from doing anything. She CHOSE to stop. No one put duct tape on her mouth!

Actually, it appears your purpose is to prvent others from airing their opinions (e.g., heckling). Sorry bud, we're not in China.

[aways]

Originally posted by RKC
That's too easy...Left vs. batons on campus? Sure....

Ole Miss 1962
UC Berkeley 1964
Kent State 1970

Surely you can do better than 35+ years ago...
Slightly different circumstances if the "free speech" was
in the form of riots...

How about discrimination against the Right? Sure....
1980's & 1990's just about everywhere other than Dartmouth!

So in today's world we're in agreement that the threat to free speech comes from the left.