Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Gingrich defends free speech curbs
MSNBC ^ | 12/16/06 | RILEY YATES

Posted on 12/18/2006 4:31:03 PM PST by DBCJR

MANCHESTER, N.H. - Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich last night defended his call to limit freedom of speech to combat terrorism, comments that last month provoked strident criticism from liberal groups.

Gingrich said the threat of biological or nuclear attack requires America to consider curbs to speech to fight terrorists, if it is to protect the society that makes the First Amendment possible.

(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.msn.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: freespeech; gingrich; media; waronterror
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-26 next last
Liberal Dems like free speech when it comes to their causes. Michael Moore can severely edit video giving us Fahrenheit 911 during a time of war, and that's OK. But they support "hate crime" legislation against their special interest groups, a violation of the Equal Protection doctrine of our Constitution. Moveon.org can shred truth. CBS manufactures lies, and the evidence to support them, and that's OK. But the Swift Boat Vets create a storm of liberal Dem retribution - forgetting that the liberal Dems found the McCain Feingold soft money loophole to begin with. Newt is upset that we give away all our war and anti-terrorist strategies to the terrorist right through our media, making those strategies ineffective and placing our soldiers in harms way.
1 posted on 12/18/2006 4:31:05 PM PST by DBCJR
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: DBCJR

I think we will see more prosecution of offensive speech without ever seeing a list of offensive words but the language of the charges will be coached in uncertain terms so that even precedent won't serve to exculpate or mitigate the speaker.


2 posted on 12/18/2006 4:35:51 PM PST by Old Professer (The critic writes with rapier pen, dips it twice, and writes again.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Old Professer; DBCJR

Perhaps that should have been "couched" in case some football goon decides to take a punch at me.


3 posted on 12/18/2006 4:37:32 PM PST by Old Professer (The critic writes with rapier pen, dips it twice, and writes again.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: DBCJR

Will we still be allowed to call him an idiot in the future ?? I swear I think he's working to elect Hillary.


4 posted on 12/18/2006 4:51:27 PM PST by Rumple4
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Old Professer
I think we will see more prosecution of offensive speech without ever seeing a list of offensive words but the language of the charges will be coached in uncertain terms so that even precedent won't serve to exculpate or mitigate the speaker.

(The critic writes with rapier pen, dips it twice, and writes again.)

Indeed.

Merry Christmas

FMCDH(BITS)

5 posted on 12/18/2006 4:52:38 PM PST by nothingnew (I fear for my Republic due to marxist influence in our government. Open eyes/see)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Old Professer

My point has to do with the irreverent and inconsistent use of "free speech" by liberal Dems in light of their attacks against Gingrich. Traditionally, free speech has been curbed in war times utilizing a countervailing greater public welfare constitutional argument.


6 posted on 12/18/2006 4:54:01 PM PST by DBCJR (What would you expect?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: DBCJR
Gingrich said the threat of biological or nuclear attack requires America to consider curbs to speech to fight terrorists, if it is to protect the society that makes the First Amendment possible.

Sounds reasonable to me. Just as the Second Amendment does not guarantee every citizen the right to collect surface-to-air missiles, the First Amendment does not make it okay to commit libel, slander, or perjury, or yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater. Or to conspire to commit acts of terrorism.

7 posted on 12/18/2006 4:56:35 PM PST by AmericanExceptionalist (Democrats believe in discussing the full spectrum of ideas, all the way from far left to center-left)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DBCJR
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.

-- Benjamin Franklin --

8 posted on 12/18/2006 4:58:57 PM PST by Izzy Dunne (Hello, I'm a TAGLINE virus. Please help me spread by copying me into YOUR tag line.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AmericanExceptionalist
Sounds reasonable to me. Just as the Second Amendment does not guarantee every citizen the right to collect surface-to-air missiles, the First Amendment does not make it okay to commit libel, slander, or perjury, or yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater. Or to conspire to commit acts of terrorism.

Or to attack President Hillary of Obama. The can probably make an equally valid argument if they come to power that this is "reasonable."

9 posted on 12/18/2006 4:59:55 PM PST by Captain Kirk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: DBCJR
McCain said something similar about the First Amendment:

"He [Michael Graham] also mentioned my abridgement of First Amendment rights, i.e. talking about campaign finance reform....I know that money corrupts....I would rather have a clean government than one where quote First Amendment rights are being respected, that has become corrupt. If I had my choice, I’d rather have the clean government."

source: Captain's Quarters Blog

McCain has already made one attempt to curb the Internet, but the FEC (IIRC) shot that down. McCain vowed to try again. Look for more attempts this coming year -- especially in bills passed during the cover of darkness.
10 posted on 12/18/2006 5:05:10 PM PST by TomGuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DBCJR

I don't believe limiting free speech should be on the conservative agenda. The Left's efforts to limit free speech are bad enough.


11 posted on 12/18/2006 5:09:21 PM PST by popdonnelly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rumple4

About 6 months ago Newt said Hitlery would be the next Pres. I couldn't believe he would say something like that. Just the thought of her in the White House is repulsive.


12 posted on 12/18/2006 5:12:05 PM PST by unkus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: popdonnelly

The point being made here is that liberal Dems are ONLY considerate of free speech when it suits their agenda. It is purely manipulative.


13 posted on 12/18/2006 5:21:24 PM PST by DBCJR (What would you expect?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: AmericanExceptionalist; Carry_Okie; calcowgirl
I agree with your exceptions to some extent, however, those exceptions are not what makes America an "exceptional" nation!!! Newt proved himself to me to not be a constitutionalist when he kept backing some of the extreme measures used by GovernMental EnvironMental agencies!!!

Neither EnvironMentalism, nor those agencie are authorized by our constitution, but rather a treaty RATified by voice vote in the Senate about the time I was born. Sadly treaties are the only thing that supercede the supreme law of our land, not Newt Gingrich or anyother turkey politician!!!

I really like your screen name and sincerely hope it means to you that America, it's people and it's constitution are truly exceptional in history, not because we can make these little exceptions to our founding document that lives, but doesn't breath!!!

14 posted on 12/18/2006 5:22:57 PM PST by SierraWasp (Proud "100 percenter," wanting CA & US to stick with winning "core" conservatism 100% of the time!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: unkus

I had my doubts about him when he teamed with Hilary for their health care reform proposal. Now he gives the left a headline, he gives them a campaign platform.


15 posted on 12/18/2006 5:31:22 PM PST by Rumple4
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Rumple4

I like Newt but sometimes he will say something (like you say) that gives the Dims some advantage. I don't trust Dick Morris anymore.


16 posted on 12/18/2006 5:35:56 PM PST by unkus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: DBCJR
I happened to watch Meet the Press yesterday because it featured Newt. He made essentially the same point but with many buttressing points the Union Leader story ignores.

He argues the ACLU and cohort have no problem with the suppression of free speech in the unconstitutional McCain-Feingold CFR because it suits their purpose. After all, it's only American citizens whose rights are being curtailed. Yet all the usual suspects (here as well as in the ACLU) scream bloody murder when it's suggested the First Amendment isn't a suicide pact that should allow potential terrorists out to kill us more speech rights than American citizens. I'm with Newt all the way on this and much else.

17 posted on 12/18/2006 5:49:55 PM PST by Bernard Marx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AmericanExceptionalist

You're right, but at the same time, by allowing the curbing of some 2nd amendment rights, we've opened ourselves up to the very real possibility of losing ALL of our 2nd amendment rights.

You don't want to get that ball rolling with the 1st amendment, too. This is a classic no-win situation, but IMO, we're better off leaving it alone.


18 posted on 12/18/2006 5:50:57 PM PST by VOR78
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: SierraWasp
I keep getting the impression that Republican politicians are coming out of the woodwork to assure that Hillary gets elected.

I hope I'm wrong. See tag line.

19 posted on 12/18/2006 5:53:14 PM PST by Carry_Okie (Duncan Hunter for President)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: SierraWasp
I keep getting the impression that Republican politicians are coming out of the woodwork to assure that Hillary gets elected.

I hope I'm wrong. See tag line.

20 posted on 12/18/2006 5:56:01 PM PST by Carry_Okie (Duncan Hunter for President)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-26 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson