Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski to speak at City Club of Cleveland, and people are incensed

CLEVELAND, Ohio - Former Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski is speaking next month at the City Club of Cleveland, and the outcry has been one of the most volatile in the 105-year history of the citadel of free speech.

The City Club has received some positive feedback about the Aug. 3 forum with Lewandowski, now a commentator on Fox News, yet voices of intolerance were the loudest...

...The reactions have prompted Moulthrop to defend the club's decision in an op-ed piece on cleveland.com.

Why the City Club invited Corey Lewandowski to Cleveland: Dan Moulthrop (Opinion)

"We're interested in Lewandowski's perspective because he helped run a campaign that no one thought would win," Moulthrop said. "His philosophy was 'Let Trump be Trump,' which ultimately worked. He has a point of view that I think is worth listening to."

The City Club regularly hosts civic leaders, political candidates and others for a half-hour speech and half-hour question-and-answer period.

The club's mission is to "create conversations of consequence that help democracy thrive," and its vision is of " individuals and communities that prize freedom of speech and civil, civic dialogue."

But the City Club has experienced pushback on previous speakers. This spring, conservatives criticized the appearance of Bernie Sanders.

Cuyahoga Democratic and Republican party officers could not be reached for comment.

In the past, pro-Israel audience members disrespected a Palestinian-American speaker, Moulthrop wrote in his op-ed. An audience member once asked a racist question of a black Atlantic correspondent.

Now let's see if Free Speech is really alive or dead. It is one thing to shut it down on a college campus, wholly another to do so at a bastion of Free Speech like the Cleveland City Club.

You are not "morally" obligated to LISTEN to anyone, we are morally obligated to allow people's voice to speak. We all have Freedom of Speech whether one approves or disapproves of the ideas or debate put forth. Anyone can grab a soapbox and be heard. It is their Right to do so, but no one is obligated to listen. One has the moral Right to walk away, to offer contrary debate, but neither is morally obligated to listen to the other.

Funny how we all have a Right to speak, but no moral obligation of others to listen to contrarian views. If a contrarian view is not amplified for the individual to hear for themselves and decide the idea's relevancy, then what should that failure to amplify other ideas be called if not censorship? We must be exposed and hear...and dare say listen to other viewpoints. While not in anyway a 'moral obligation' it is an obligation of a civilized free society to allow ideas to be heard, to learn, or to reject that which is presented.

"In the past, pro-Israel audience members disrespected a Palestinian-American speaker, Moulthrop wrote in his op-ed."

So what ? There's no such thing as a "Palestinian" or a "Palestine." It's an Arab anti-Semite/anti-Zionist.

"An audience member once asked a racist question of a black Atlantic correspondent."

What was the question ? Is he a member of the plantation party ? Why does he have a funny name ? Was he born a poor White child in Mississippi ? Does he like fried chicken ? What was this "racist" question ?

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.