Nothing you wrote supports your assertion, more like misdirection. If President Bush doesn't "allow" criticism of himself, what exactly do you think Code Pink, ANSWER, DU, Kos, Michael Moore, Soros, etc do 24/7? The man has received more criticism and vitriol than any other president, and it hasn't let up and won't stop anytime soon; if your statements were true none of this would be going on.
I have no problem with the statement of "there ought to be limits on freedom." Person A's freedom stops where it infringes on Person B's freedom. You don't have the freedom to yell "fire" in a theater, or joke about bombs at the airport, or drive recklessly down the street.
He's apparently had to tone back his instincts since becoming president. But his track record as governor is solidly proven. OTOH, he still enjoys herding those who disagree with him into "free speech zones" out of the way of the cameras.
I have no problem with the statement of "there ought to be limits on freedom."
I do when it applies to political satire, which is just about as old as our nation itself. Contributors to some of the best threads on FR would have been subject to prosecution during the Clinton years if we didn't have that freedom.
Limiting freedom doesn't sound quite as good when it's our own freedom, expressing our own point of view, that we're talking about.