Posted on 04/24/2017 7:29:01 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
I grudgingly admire this dudes willingness to go all-in on his position after having been scolded last week by half the lawyers on the Internet. If youre out to censor your political opponents on hate speech grounds, you cant let some clucking by First Amendment experts frighten you.
He mentions three cases that supposedly make Ann Coulters right to speak at Berkeley a close call which ultimately can be infringed on safety grounds or whatever. One is the Chaplinsky decision from 1942, in which the Supreme Court held that fighting words can be banned because theyre likely to lead to violence. The second is the Snyder v. Phelps decision from a few years ago, when an 8-1 Court upheld the Westboro Baptist Churchs right to picket a fallen soldiers funeral. The third is the 2002 decision in Virginia v. Black, when the Court ruled that certain types of cross-burnings can be prohibited by the state. Heres what happened in that case:
On May 2, 1998, respondents Richard Elliott and Jonathan OMara, as well as a third individual, attempted to burn a cross on the yard of James Jubilee. Jubilee, an African-American, was Elliotts next-door neighbor in Virginia Beach, Virginia. Four months prior to the incident, Jubilee and his family had moved from California to Virginia Beach. Before the cross burning, Jubilee spoke to Elliotts mother to inquire about shots being fired from behind the Elliott home. Elliotts mother explained to Jubilee that her son shot firearms as a hobby, and that he used the backyard as a firing range....
(Excerpt) Read more at hotair.com ...
We’re getting beat down at rally’s and pushed further and further with each passing year and our side is still just talking.
I’m now firmly in my brother in laws camp. Right thinking Americans are simply too busy, too comfortable, too scared or all 3 to stand up to the left.
It only protects people screaming “Raaaaaaarrrrrrr!” in a high voice.
Consider taking a look at Berkeley; at 4Chan; at Reddit’s The_Donald channel; and looking up from Fox or CNN to read the rollback of regulations and the removal of Deep State plants to see what’s actually happening behind the constant Reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee from the Anti-First-Amendment left.
I’ll admit, the MSM don’t make it trivial to find out, but don’t panic. The people are definitely busy but neither comfortable nor scared.
Hate speech is anything any given person that loves Obama and Clinton says it is.
Duh.
Don’t you know anything?!
Sheesh! /s
Hate speech is anything any given person that loves Obama and Clinton says it is.
Duh.
Don’t you know anything?!
Sheesh! /s
” 4Chan; at Reddits The_Donald channel”
Both good sources for raw intel and ferreting out the identities of antifa cowards.
But probably hard for those used to clean and clear formats to follow. Easier when their information gets picked up by Breitbart, Gateway Pundit and other such sites.
If the first amendment prohibited “hate speech” no Democrat would EVER be allowed to open his or her (or its) mouth in public again.
Re Howard Dean. Just because you are/were a doctor doesn’t mean that you can’t be batshit crazy at the same time. Dean is living proof of this axiom.
I’m now awaiting for bats to complaint that I mentioned them in describing Weird Howard. I apologize to them, esp. the Fruit Bats who are harmless creatures.
If the First Amendment didn’t protect hate speech, then the left would have to shut up.
Hey, Howie...
If the 1st amendment doesn’t permit “hate” speech, then that means Sharpton, J. Jackson, BLM, antiFA, etc., would all be deprived of stirring up violence.
Wonder if Howie realizes he just said the First Amendment doesn’t protect 97.4% of what comes out of the Left.....
Howard Dean’s reply to CNN’s Wolf Blitzer, ... “I hate the Republicans and everything they stand for, ... “
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.