-
Have a seat and we can chat.
Posted on 06/09/2010 12:51:56 PM PDT by Kaslin
A few months ago, a picture appeared in The Denver Post. On a local college campus -- an alleged stronghold of free inquiry and debate -- a leftist student, protesting some perceived injustice, was holding a sign that argued:
"Hate speech is not free speech!"
Perhaps this earnest 20-something had not fully thought through her illiberal position on "tolerable" political speech. Perhaps she was part of that broader movement that sees "hate" everywhere among its ideological opponents. Either way, it's tragic that so many young people misunderstand the idea of open debate -- or simply devalue liberty.
Some people accept that certain things cannot -- rather than should not -- be said. Beyond the worrisome assaults on free speech (fairness doctrines, higher education, etc.) there is a slipperier concern. Which brings me to Helen Thomas' now infamous and career-ending comment, in which she helpfully suggested that the Jews get "the hell out of Palestine."
True, I find some comfort in knowing that this unprofessional crackpot never will haunt a president, common sense or the public again. But I wince at the rapidity of her demise. And I feel a nagging anxiety about a journalist's losing her job over nothing more than a controversial statement.
"She should lose her job over this," former White House press secretary Ari Fleischer said before Thomas gave in to a forced retirement. "As someone who is Jewish and as someone who worked with her and used to like her, I find this appalling."
Cliff May, president of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies and former roving reporter for Hearst (which syndicated Thomas' column), in a letter urged the company "strenuously" to "cut all ties" with Thomas "as quickly as possible."
It seems an odd reaction, especially for conservatives, who are accused regularly of thought crimes and hate speech by outfits like Media Matters, which are in the business of smearing and discrediting those who disagree with them.
But an opinion -- in Thomas' case, an ugly opinion that in all probability is more common than some people might believe -- is no more than the strength of the logic behind it. As a regular defender of the moral right of Israel to fight the theocrats and fascists whom Thomas embraces, I never thought she was very credible or articulate on the topic, and she is unworthy of the over-the-top reactions of critics.
Nevertheless, at this point in her career, the 89-year-old was still a columnist for Hearst newspapers. A columnist offers provocative views. You don't have to like Thomas, and you don't have to read her columns, but having a disdain for Jews in general or Israel in particular is hardly the most offensive thought that's kicking around.
Though I don't hold an earthly stake in debates over God, Bill Maher's ludicrous anti-Catholic rants or a tome from a polemist like Christopher Hitchens (who condemns all religion as a dangerous farce) might be "appalling" to rather large swaths of the public. Are certain topics off the table?
Of course, I am not suggesting that Thomas has a birthright to sit in the front row at a White House news conference (a situation that hasn't made sense for at least three decades) or that anyone has an inalienable right to pontificate about the world for a newspaper chain or anyone else.
And no, I can't mourn the loss of Helen Thomas' detestable opinions. But at the same time, I can't help but feel some trepidation about the ease in which some voices -- in this case, one voice that is probably more honest than others of similar ideological disposition -- can be expelled from the conversation simply for offending.
The author obviously hasn't been paying attention since the Johnson Administration.
I’m Jewish, as far as I’m concerned she is free to say whatever she wants - at her house, out with friends, protesting in the street, wherever - as a private citizen.
When a person who has been seen at the White House of the United States of America virtually daily for decades, says those things - AT THE WHITE HOUSE - it is unacceptable.
It gives the impression across the world that the American people do not support Israel. That impression of course is a lie - but the fact that we apparently have a freakin sleeper agent as POTUS right now still does not mean that the American public should have to tolerate all the BS he’s basically promoting throughout the world.
There was a reason she felt comfortable saying what she did - and the reason is Obama. For me, it is not about free speech is about foreign policy.
I doubt there is a person in this country who would think it was okay if she had told Blacks to go back to Africa, or Canadians to go back to France... We need to have the balls to draw the line where it needs to be drawn and to stand up for the right for free speech when that is needed too.
I’m so tired of people in the press and in government SERVICE treating Americans like we are stupid - we are not stupid - and we are getting angrier by the day.
And after all, if it can happen to conservatives, it should also happen to progressives.
BINGO!
And I feel a nagging anxiety about a journalist’s losing her job over nothing more than a controversial statement.”
Nothing about freedom of speech shields us from the consequences of stupidity. Helen Thomas has not had her first amendment rights violated, She made a statement which people disagreed with and which illustrated perfectly the biases which have relfected upon her work for some time. This was simply a visible outworking of her vile tendencies.
I agree with the idea that the old hag Thomas should not have been fired/retired but I would have been sure to hang her nasty comments around her neck for the world to see. She is such a shrew!!
When there are laws being passed, then we should worry...
oh, wait, there ARE laws being discussed/passed against “hate speech” or “hate crimes” if the offended party is minority, Islamic, or homo.
Now all they have to do, once the precedent is set, all they have to do is change the definition of “hate speech” to “criticizing the government”.
This was us applying Alinsky’s rule of making one’s adversaries live by their own rules. One of the PC police just got hoisted by her own petard.
Why should Thomas have a protected job, when any of us would be fired for making equally derogatory statements? The only wrongs here is that Thomas was allowed to have her job as long as she has and then some would defend her when she should be forced out in shame and derision.
Wake up author. The courts have long allowed the local and federal government to regulate speech in the work place under sexual, racial , and orientation harassment laws. If I was to tell a coworker I find his homosexuality repulsive the employer MUST punish me or be in violation of local laws (federal law for other classifications) . And it's not just liberals that believe my workplace speech is not protected from the government(in the case of race or sex anyway.)
So firing Helen Thomas is nothing out of the ordinary. Plus she would have any one of us fired given a chance.
If I walk up to my boss and say “Hey, you effing pr*ck. Why don’t you take a walk off a cliff”, I have the right to say it but don’t have the right to keep my job.
Words have consequences.
She still has freedom of speech. But she paid the consequences for the exercise of that right by being forced to relinquish her role as a member of the MSM.
That’s one reason free speech should be protected at all costs. So we know who is evil and who is a fool.
But we have to remember there are consequences to our actions and with rights go responsibilities, a concept sorely absent from the public discourse nowadays.
At age 89.
Probably a pretty satisfying way to end a career, for a gal who loved being in the front-row-middle seat, loved to talk, and loved to be outre.
Everybody practiced "freedom of speech," and nobody violated it.
What's the problem, again?
She used to be a journalist and later became a columnist
In (her) case I would say it was just the final straw. The woman came across as drunk or senile or both on the video, and was an embarrassment to the WH press corpse to the paper and herself. She was fortunate they let her retire.
her freedom of speech was not violated, she can still talk and write and nobody will try to stop her.
-
Have a seat and we can chat.
I have always said that Free speech has consequences.
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.