The Democrats' Credibility Gap on Free Speech

Townhall.com ^ | August 11, 2009 | Lorie Byrd

[Kaslin]

Over the weekend, Democrat congressional leaders Nancy Pelosi and Steny Hoyer wrote of the recent protests taking place in town hall meetings around the country, “These disruptions are occurring because opponents are afraid not just of differing views — but of the facts themselves. Drowning out opposing views is simply un-American.” 

The White House is concerned that their health care plan is not being accurately characterized.  They have even encouraged Americans who read or hear their friends and neighbors saying anything “fishy” to report them to flag@whitehouse.gov.

Democrats’ concerns about allowing all viewpoints to be heard accurately would be a lot more credible if they had not been silent when those on the right were being silenced and demagogued.  In many cases leading Democrats were not silent, but actively participated in the demagoguery, spreading misinformation far and wide with the assistance of their friends in the media.

 There have been many such examples over the past few decades.  Remember Democrats’ claims that Republicans wanted to starve old people and school children? You know, back when they used to tell Americans on a regular basis that an increase in spending was really a cut if it was not as big an increase as Democrats wanted? 

Remember when Democrats said Newt Gingrich wanted to let Medicare “wither on the vine” when he actually said “…we believe that it's going to wither on the vine because we think [seniors] are going to leave it voluntarily.”

Remember all the accusations of “blood for oil” during the debate over the war in Iraq? And that “Bush lied,” when he said he believed Saddam Hussein possessed WMD, even though every leading Democrat politician had claimed the same thing?

I believe we should be debating the health care issue based on facts, not rumors or mischaracterizations, but to have, of all people in this world, Nancy Pelosi preaching it is beyond ridiculous.

It is equally ridiculous to hear those on the angry left discredit and ridicule those American citizens -- Republicans, Libertarians and independent-minded Democrats – who have legitimate concerns over the inaccurately named stimulus plan, bailouts and the attempt to put the American health care system under government control .   Many in the media have joined in, labeling these concerned citizens as “angry mobs,” or, if reporting from MSNBC, as “tea baggers.”

Prompted by the “un-American” comment in Pelosi and Hoyer’s USA Today piece, Jon Henke points to the difference in attitude when the anger was coming from those on the left.  He quotes Glenn Greenwald: “Anger, when constructively directed, is a potent and inspiring passion. It is noble to be angry about dangerous situations and corrupt leaders, and there are few passions which can compete with anger for inspiring oneself and others to meaningful action.” 

I guess anger is a good thing, if in the right hands.  (Or, should I say, the left hands?)

It is hard to listen to Democrats squeal with indignation about their freedom of speech being stifled when they control the White House and the Congress, and when in the past, their supporters are the ones who did so much to crush conservative dissent .

Remember when conservative author and columnist Ann Coulter had two pies thrown at her during a speech at the University of Arizona to College Republicans?  At least she was able to speak.  There are many examples of conservatives being denied the right to speak at public universities by liberal protesters, in some cases due to violence or the threat of violence. 

When former Colorado congressman Tom Tancredo tried to speak at the University of North Carolina – Chapel Hill on the issue of in-state tuition for illegal immigrants earlier this year, “Hundreds of protesters converged on Bingham Hall, shouting profanities and accusations of racism while Tancredo and the student who introduced him tried to speak. Minutes into the speech, a protester pounded a window of the classroom until the glass shattered, prompting Tancredo to flee and campus police to shut down the event.”

William Jacobson put things into perspective when he wrote, “So this is what it comes to. After eight years of protesters hanging George Bush in effigy, calling him a Nazi, disrupting conservative speeches on campuses by taking over stages or throwing pies, creating websites and movies that wished for Bush's death, and a myriad of other indignities.... After all this time, Nancy Pelosi and Steny Hoyer discover what it means to be ‘Un-American.’”

I believe everyone should be allowed to publicly express their viewpoint, but others should be allowed to peaceably protest as well.   The Dixie Chicks had every right to express their opposition to the war, their dislike of President Bush and their contempt for their conservative fans, but those fans also had the right to boycott their concerts and stop buying their music.

It is often hard to find the voice of conservative America in the mainstream media, even when their views on issues are shared by the majority.  Now that the Democrats control the White House and Congress, they have even more “bully pulpit” power.  More is not enough for them though.  They won’t be happy until their opponents are silenced.

Average Americans, many who have never before publicly protested, are now feeling empowered enough to exercise their right of free speech.  When hundreds of thousands of average Americans showed up at over 800 “tea parties” held in over 800 cities, and in every state in the country, on April 15, 2009, those in the media yawned.  Compared to the media attention Cindy Sheehan and her Code Pink friends garnered when opposing the war in Iraq, those hundreds of thousands of Americans were ignored.  Worse yet, some in the media even ridiculed them.

It is not hard to understand why some of them decided they needed to speak with louder voices to be heard.  Now that they are being heard, those in the White House say they don’t deserve to be.  I think it is too late.  If opinion polls are an accurate indication, they are being heard loud and clear, and it is going to take more than even the anointed Obama can get away with to silence them now.

[DManA]

but of the facts themselves. Drowning out opposing views is simply un-American.”

She neatly changes the subject, drowning out everyone with an opposing view on health care.

[GeronL]

Interesting. I just posted this to my blog that nobody ever reads:

MSNHBC hosts agreed that calling someone a "socialist" is like using the N-word? Is this like when we could not use Obamas' middle name during the campaign? Is this like saying dissent is now un-American?

Why is it that liberals always want to control the speech and thoughts of other people? They simply want to rewrite the rules to shut down the opposition because they know they cannot win an honest debate.

CNN apparently has banned guests who are talk radio show hosts. They want people who are smart and honest and fair like posters from Kos and the Hiffington Post. So much more mainstream than the fringe radical 57% who oppose ObamaCare. They might as well just come right out and ban any opposing voices and get it over with.

Opposing voices are "Un-American" after all and CNN wouldn't want to be reported to the White House Disinformation Office.

Those MSNBC hosts might want to think about what kind of idiocy they're bringing to the fore when they equate the word "socialist" with a racial slur. If for no other reason than Newsweek has already declared all of you liberals to be socialists.

[a fool in paradise]

Remember when Barack Obama said that he was going to be a uniter and not a DIVIDER as Bush “was”?

What has he done to unite this nation?

What has he done to dismiss those who disagree?

“I won”.

[Typical_Whitey]

[Eagles6]

"William Jacobson put things into perspective when he wrote, “So this is what it comes to. After eight years of protesters hanging George Bush in effigy, calling him a Nazi, disrupting conservative speeches on campuses by taking over stages or throwing pies, creating websites and movies that wished for Bush's death, and a myriad of other indignities.... After all this time, Nancy Pelosi and Steny Hoyer discover what it means to be ‘Un-American.’"

This is so...last year. Dissent with the administration was patriotic...last year. Calling the President a nazi was the thing to do...last year.

[The Great RJ]

I fear that the stinging rebuke being delivered on health care will be used as an excuse to bridle talk radio and cable TV news with the Fairness Doctrine. Watch while our First Amendment rights disappear. I already have a shortwave radio and expect in the near future to get uncensored news and opinion only from the other side of the Obama curtain.

[haroldeveryman]

“Those MSNBC hosts might want to think about what kind of idiocy they’re bringing to the fore when they equate the word “socialist” with a racial slur.”

It looks to me like the “Socialists” may be conditioning the the great unwashed to equate criticisms of their policies with “hate speech”.

[coydog]

Depends if the “great unwashed” are still buying what they’re selling. If not, any serious attempts at censorship will not make the anger go away, just redirect it to more violent channels. They should have a good long think over this. It may not turn out the way they desire.

[Christian4Bush]

mark

[Paleo Conservative]

[bamahead]

They won’t be happy until their opponents are silenced.



Libertarian ping! Click here to get added or here to be removed or post a message here!
(View past Libertarian pings here)

[Le Chien Rouge]

Am I the only person who sees the conflict between those who support conservative ideals and those who support state intervention into private lives becoming quite VIOLENT in the next several weeks???

It’s going to get ugly very soon.

[MrB]

That’s exactly what it is.

In essence, the left has branded any speaking of the truth about them as “hate speech”.

They ARE socialists/Marxists and it IS the truth,
so they try to silence the truth by equating it with the “N-word”.

[MrB]

Sure would be nice to have the authority of the stateS at our backs when it comes to that.

It makes it politically difficult for the fedthugs to quash dissent when that dissent is backed by a legitimate political entity.

[Condor51]

Nancy Pelosi and Steny Hoyer wrote ... Drowning out opposing views is simply un-American.”

Oh really. Are you ... 'questioning my Patriotism'?!?

I seem to recall that meme coming from the RATS every time they committed Sedition during the 'Iraq War'.₍₁₎

There never was an 'Iraq War', Per se. Iraq was just one front of 'The War' we were and still are fighting.
Saying 'Iraq War' would be like saying 'Japan War' in 1944.

[TheFourthMagi]

Republicans need to proclaim that there is no “big tent” on free speech.

Republicans need to stand for unfettered free speech, unrestricted by campaign finance bureaucracy, or campus speech codes, or ‘hate speech’ laws.

Standing on principle like that would be a major rallying point and draw.

And the Democrats cannot match it because they are beholden to their tribal cliques.

[haroldeveryman]

The reason this is dangerous is that by incremental advances in notions of “hate speech” it could become illegal in the near future to criticize the left’s agenda. Obama has recently lectured the great unwashed that the rights granted to us by the Constitution are “limited” because they are “negative rights”. The implication is that he wants “positive rights”(the opposite of the Bill of Rights), which in part could take the form of “hate speech” laws specifically designed to enforce his “reforms”.