Why do liberals seek to limit free speech?
 

It is hard to imagine a political group so intent to limit free speech. This is particulary prevalent on college campuses which were once the bastions of free speech and exploration of alternative viewpoints. Are they afraid that is a conservative viewpoint is allowed to be expressed...it will just make more sense than thier liberal hate-filled agenda?

Heckling causes Coulter to cut UConn speech short

By SHELLEY K. WONG
Associated Press Writer

December 7, 2005, 10:28 PM EST

STORRS, Conn. -- Conservative columnist Ann Coulter gave up trying to finish a speech at the University of Connecticut on Wednesday night when boos and jeers from the audience became overwhelming.

Coulter cut off the talk after 15 minutes and instead held a half-hour question-and-answer session.

"I love to engage in repartee with people who are stupider than I am," Coulter told the 2,600 people at Jorgensen Auditorium.

Coulter's appearance prompted protests from several groups, including Students Against Hate and the Puerto Rican/Latin American Cultural Center. They criticized her for spreading a message of hate and intolerance.

Nearly 100 students gathered inside the Student Union for a rally against Coulter. About a half-dozen people held protest signs outside the auditorium.

After a book signing following her appearance, Coulter called the audience's reaction "typical."

Coulter, originally from New Canaan, Conn., has a history of bashing Democrats in best-selling books, frequent television appearances and speeches. Harding University in Arkansas dropped her from its lecture series in September, citing her abrasive image.

Last April, the president of the University of St. Thomas in Minnesota denounced a speech on the campus by Coulter, calling it hateful. In October 2004, University of Arizona police arrested two men who ran on stage and threw custard pies at Coulter; one of the pies glanced off her shoulder.

In her speech at UConn, Coulter called Bill Clinton an "executive buffoon" who won the presidency only because Ross Perot took 19 percent of the vote. She called California Sen. Barbara Boxer a good candidate for the Democrats because "she is a woman and she's learning disabled."

During the question-and-answer session, someone asked Coulter if she really was against a woman's right to vote.

"Not having women vote is a joke," she said, reversing comments she has previously made.

Eric Knudsen, a 19-year-old sophomore journalism and social welfare major at UConn, didn't attend the speech.

"We encourage diverse opinion at UConn, but this is blatant hate speech," said Knudsen, head of Students Against Hate.

Kareem Mohni, a 20-year-old junior and a member of a campus Republicans group, said he was disgusted with the Jorgensen crowd.

"It really appalled me that we're not able to come together as a group and listen to a different view in a respectful environment," he said.

"....liberal hate-filled agenda."

What is this agenda?

I am forming a group called...I hate, hate and anybody who disagrees with me.

David Horowitz, who is decidedly unhateful, gets this reaction too. This stooped, affable, scratchy-voiced, bespectaled 65-year-old was recently assaulted on the stage of Butler College by a group of students who never even allowed him to speak. In fact, they carried placards which said "You have no right to speak." There's free speech for you. These protests have nothing to do with the "hate speech" of the speaker, everything to do with the hateful intolerance -- fear, actually -- of the radical. But Horowitz is in fact a more formidable enemy to the Left than Coulter, as he is promoting around the country an "Academic Bill of Rights," which guarantees equal shares of student activity funds to competing political groups. What could be fairer? Apparently the Left isn't interested in fairness, only in their continued stranglehold on campus speech. But Horowitz's campaign is showing results, slowly. He has defended several students given failing grades for opposing teacher's Leftist dictates, gotten a couple of Deans fired for outrageous abuses of power, and moved some state legislatures to "liberalize" (truly liberalize, that is) campus speech codes. Now there is a man to fear!

I think that any group that tends to assault or otherwise physically prevent another's free speech in a public forum....certainly has a "hate-filled agenda."

Lets just face it I hate Liberals....and why ...cause they are fking morons...

Sounds like the students were exercizing their right to free speech.

'Coulter called the audience's reaction "typical." ' - how can she be surprised? sounds like she enjoys baiting people. If you keep getting the same reaction to the same vitriol does that mean everyone else is wrong? Yes, according to Princess Ann. Someone needs to tame this shrew.

"I love to engage in repartee with people who are stupider than I am," Coulter told the 2,600 people at Jorgensen Auditorium.

- I guess this why she likes to hang with Reps.

Since when is preventing another's free speech...free speech? Only in liberal bizarro world.

Of course it is typical. She is assaulted or harassed almost every time she speaks. Obviously, the liberals are afraid of true freedom of speech. They seek to prevent the people who come to hear what Ann has to say from doing so.

Sounds like you are working on joining that group. Obviously, a little reading comprehension...and not taking the words out-of-context...would make even a person educated in government schools realize that the repartee was with the liberals who were attempting to prevent her free speech..

What fking conceit you have....personally I think Liberals are like fking sheep....not an orginal thinker among them...they might as well all be standing at the airport jumping up and down chanting in unison...GW is Bad....

"...would make even a person educated in government schools realize (assume) that the repartee was with the liberals who were attempting to prevent her free speech..."

You know what happens when you assume... Besides what fun is the proper context anyway?

"What fking conceit you have....personally I think Liberals are like fking sheep...."

How do you know what it is like to fk sheep?

I assumed your remark was "tongue in cheek"...........as mine was.

I agree with Tabs.....most are sheep.

Because like sheep Liberals have big Aholes....

This guy surely believes in free speech.

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1134117999.jpg

Excuse me? Free speech is being allowed to voice your feelings and opinions. What happened here is that the students would not allow a person to speak at all, which is exactly the same thing that Burma, China and N. Korea are doing with some of their critics.

Please tell me the difference other than in our case it was a group of students and in the other case it is the govt? I cannot see any difference and all the liberals are up in arms against these three nations for not allowing free speech, while they attempt to prevent anyone from a speech that shows a viewpoint that they do not like.

I may not have liked Bill Clinton but I let him speak. He has a right to say his side of anything. In this case Ann Coulter was not allowed the same priviledge, and that is just not correct.

Joe A

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.

Absolutely not.... free speech was not stifled one bit.

It was heard loud and clear!

Man, you guys sure hate dealing with the consequences for one's actions, don't you?

Oh, SHADDAP!!!!!!!

Note: I'm not stifling your freedom of speech, I'm just exercising my own! :P ;)

Randy

LOL

You know it.



Sidenote: I find the title to this thread hilarious...this is free speech in action!

Ok, so you want people to have to deal with the consequences for their own actions?

So if a person squanders away their time; doesn't accept the free educational opportunities offered to all in this country, doesn't work hard and doesn't save money -- and subsequently ends up poor -- I guess you will agree with me when I say to such people: "Tough, your condition of poverty is a consequence of your own actions. You deal with it; I'm not going to give you a hand-out."

Well put CC. Conservatives have always stood for personal responsibility, the number one reason I respect true Conservatives and am one in many ways. I guess that part of the charter got left in a desk drawer when the neocons split off. The Iraq War is another example as the largest, most expensive, least ROI government entitlement program ever created.

This episode boils down to: Rich girl Coulter couldn't stand the heat after making inflammatory remarks. Funny, she thinks women should stay in the kitchen, yet she runs from it every time someone stands up to her book sales marketing plan, umm, I mean heated rhetoric.

Absolutely!

And don't forget corporate bailout...you mess up..the government shouldn't be bailing you out.

And this "energy bill"....more welfare.


Too bad, so sad. Deal with the consequences of your actions. I have to. I am held accountable, why shouldn't corporations, individuals, and Coulter?

speech without responsibility.. huh !

but then again the truth makes some people constipated.

Yep

Suggestion, go libertarian...they're the only conservatives in this country.

Yep.

I'm certain Coulter was constipated that night....

I despise Coulter. It seems the only thing she is capable is an attack against people who do not hold her views. She wraps this hate speech in flower language and extra long words. I suspect that most of what she says is purely to sell her books. Still she emitimizes the lack tolerence for other opinions.

Having said that. Nobody should be shouted down or have pies thrown at them. The people who do these things only make themselves look like idiots. There are plenty of places and forums to disagree with Coulter and her ilk without resorting to desperate tactics.

We better frame this one: I agree with Fint. This sort of action reflects very badly on Liberals in general.

Question: how do you know these hecklers were "liberal?" Or is this another one of those ASSumptions?

Yo, Flint...

Why will I end up haveing to fight and kill Neo Cons in order to preserve the freedoms that I enjoy today?

They were more likely conservatives who are tired of Coulter dragging their party through the mud.

I agree with that.

But getting back to the Coulter issue, "free speech" and heckling: Violations of "free speech" refers to the government restricting the free exchange of ideas.

To the extent that a university is (usually) receiving public funds, it does not have the right to limit the speech of someone because it doesn't like the message of the speaker (disregarding "obscenity" issues which has been pretty well covered by the courts).

Hecklers disrupting speech in a public-funded university forum, while their actions may not be official policy of the university, are demonstrating a disrespect toward the idea of free speech....and are demonstrating an immature intolerance of people who have a different opinion than theirs.

They may be saying that they are against what they call "hate speech," but normally are just using that term in an attempt to vilify people and ideas they don't agree with.

CC,
You are right,I did make an assumptuion. I assumed that the Conservative kids were too busy hanging on her every word (seeking dates, and waiting until after the talk to lynch a token liberal) to disrupt the proceedings.

Wow. Most noticable in the liberal response to this is their utter lack of respect, civility, and manners. Or expectations of such from others, more accurately. This was simply very rude behavior on the students's part. Not a single liberal here even picked up on that; that is extremely telling in and of itself.

Whatever happened to letting her say her piece, and waiting to calmly address your differences with her in the Q&A session at the end? What is so damn hard about that? Why is it liberals see absolutely nothing wrong with shouting some one down and driving them off, rather than engaging in reasoned exchange with them?

I find it incredible that anyone can twist this around into some kind of reasonable, expected consequences of her actions. Consequences that she should expect, and accept as her fault. (Insert whining, foot stomping, arm flailing here) "I don't WANT to listen to you; you can't make me; waaaahhhh; make her go away; mommmiiiieee!!!"

The fact that this behavior is acceptable to so many of you simply points to yet another realm where modern liberalism has lost it. The fact that liberalism is populated with spoiled brats that see this as a reasonable way to deal with those you dissagree with, and then blame your actions on them, speaks volumes about the decay of said liberalism. They are clearly in need of some adult supervision; I guess us conservative will just have to continue to fill that role.

Wow, CC and Shaun are having a little hippie love-fest here.

The next time Jessie Jackson opens his mouth, I'll make sure to be there to shout him down and throw pies at him. Let's see if the headlines say I was "exercising my right to free speech". :rolleyes:

You two cannot see this for what this is, and it further just validates that you are so wrapped up in how right your own opinions are you cannot even contemplate how anything else should even be listened to, let alone be valid. You are no different than children with their fingers in their ears, humming to themselves.

reap what you sow.

Coulter has a bully pulpit. She uses it to its inflammatory best. The response is "typical" and *exactly* what she wants. She doesn't want to exercise her "free speech"...she has already done that in her written pieces. She wants a media event. And she gets them. The "rude" liberals are merely too stupid to realize that they are her pawns.

But don't get on your high horse about this. Don't cry for Coulter. She knows exactly what she is doing...

Well put.

Legion. She sells books. That's her job. This one event will sell more books to "I told you so" neocons than anything else. It's a piece of her marketing campaign. She used inflammatory language to get a rise out of the audience. It got press. She'll go on H&C and talk about it.

then her production manager will call the publisher and order another 10,000 books.

Wake up neocons. Your heroes are product whores. Got to go now, I need to look for a new business suit, and Bill O'Reilly is giving me 10% off any one suit in his line if I join The Factor.

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.

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? The future of liberalism is in deeper trouble than I thought.