Hollywood Liberals Hate Free Speech

ChronWatch.com ^ | April 16, 2003 | Kevin Willmann

[sorroworechoes]

And by the way, as some posters have pointed out, these people on the extreme left aren't just anti-Bush. They are anti-the silent majority, that ain't quite so silent anymore.

[Mr.Atos]

Once you characterize my conduct as punishment, you seek, thereby, to deny me the freedom to act in a manner that is legal, ethical and moral. To deny one the freedom to act in a legal, ethical and moral way is an unacceptable position for one to espouse in our free society.

Absolutely right!! And that is the crux of this issue. Mr. Robbins has not witnessed his forum eroding as a result of our disagreement. In fact, I would argue that it has grown. But, what he is seeing is a naive generation awakened from the a philosophical catnap, where nothing is anything, morals is a dirty word, values are a questionable attribute of the 'uncultured' prude, and ethics are fodder for snickers over latte's at the bottom of Queen Anne Hill. He wants his 'groupies' back. But, we can't go back. 911 woke us all up like a pot of hot water. America is just not buying him anymore, and he can't stand it. I argue that it is he, that would like us to shut up. He made that perfectly clear in the entirety of his speech. He lashed out at his critics and all but demanded their silence. Once you characterize my conduct as punishment, you seek, thereby, to deny me the freedom to act in a manner that is legal, ethical and moral. Exactly right! I do not see anyone here advocating the denial of anyone to speak their minds. The issue that should be perfectly clear to activists (ACTIVISTS) like Robbins and Sarandon (and especially the sponsors of their activism) from now on is not that we don't want to hear it, but that we will be listening. And we too can be just as active.

[Pharlap]

Thank you for your comments. As I read them, you make two important points: (1) that, in Robbins case, the controversy surrounding him has actually resulted in his being provided more, not less, of a forum to disseminate his views, e.g., the National Press Club; and (2) he is trying, in part by casting himself (a bit of a Hollywood pun) as a victim, to stiffle opposing views from being expressed. Note how he tries to tie such views, and those who express them to the "government." Again, thanks for your analysis.