Tag Archives: Freedom of Speech

Liberals Say First Amendment Should Only Apply to Them

Posted on by
Reply

Bill Maher had his usual cast of all-stars on Real Time to discuss inaccuracy in the press. Political and Constitutional expert David Cross (who sadly was in one my favorite TV shows, Arrested Development) suggested that Bill O’Reilly and Sean Hannity should be “taken off the air.” The audience actually applauded Cross’ statement. Then, Arianna Huffington chimed in with quite possibly the dumbest idea ever expressed on the Maher show. Huffington, who’s opinion seems to matter because she inherited a fortune when her husband died, compared conservative journalism to yelling ‘fire!’ in a crowded theater. Her solution? A “technological tool” that will determine what is fact and what is fiction. Brilliant. A leading light on the intellectual Left.

Why write about the opinion of obscure Leftists on a little watched show? This line of thinking, that all dissenting opinion should be silenced, is not unique to obscure members of the Leftist fringe. In fact, President Obama has launched an all-out war on the only news network that has not yet recommended him for canonization. The President has used his office, the most powerful one in the world, to try to discredit dissenting opinions. In his recent Rolling Stone interview Obama called FOX News “destructive.” In January of 2009 Obama warned Republicans “You can’t just listen to Rush Limbaugh and get things done.” The unpresidential President has refused to be interviewed on FOX repeatedly and publicly, and even tried to ban FOX from interviewing pay czar Kenneth Feinberg, an unprecedented move towards a member of the White House press pool. Meanwhile, the administration has lauded Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow for “providing [sic] an invaluable service.”

Everyday the Left shows their utter contempt for the Constitution, and those that defend it. When the Left says that there should be a non-partisan, objective source that monitors the news, they have Media Matters, or other Leftist organizations in mind. For decades the Left controlled print and television news. Now, with talk radio, the internet and FOX News, the stranglehold the Left once had has been broken. Their response to their ideas both failing and failing to catch on is to whine that it is unfair that the competition is winning. In order to advance their agenda the Left wants to control the information that people get. The other takeaway from the Left’s position is that “the core of today’s liberalism [is that] the American people are such dopes they can’t be counted upon,” As George Will said. The Left sees Americans as bunch of dupes, being fooled by members of the media who don’t support the party line. In reality, the Left understands that their time is up. The concerted effort to silence the opposition is a desperate last gasp by the tired and failed ideology.

Arrested for Defending Life (Updated with Carleton Contact Info)

Posted on by
3

In the last year, post-secondary institutions in Ottawa have really been screwing up with this “free speech” concept that universities are supposed to embrace. Last March, the University of Ottawa made international headlines for threatening to criminally investigate Ann Coulter for a speech she hadn’t given yet; today, a group of peaceful students at Ottawa’s Carleton University were arrested and hauled off in a police van for doing the unthinkable: standing out against abortion on their own campus.

Four students were arrested this morning by Ottawa police for putting up a graphic anti-abortion display on the main quadrangle of Carleton University.

The students, all members of a pro-life group called Carleton Lifeline, applied for permission to put up the display two months ago but were turned down by the university.

The school said it did not allow large displays in the quadrangle and also cited the offensiveness of the photos.

The students were offered a room in which the photos of bloody fetuses could be shown and a table in the main university centre to invite fellow students to the display.

However, Ruth Lobo, one of the students arrested, said putting up the display was a matter of free speech and a personal obligation to “tell the truth about abortion.”

The four Carleton students have been charged with trespassing. A fifth man from Queen’s University was also charged.

These posters depicting the horrors of abortion are part of the larger “Genocide Awareness Project,” which has attracted similar controversies across the country. A couple of years ago, students at the University of Calgary were met with similar opposition and told to turn their signs around (so they were facing a fall) lest they send the police after them.

The notion that universities are biased towards the secular, humanist left is the worst-kept secret in North America. But the lesser known fact is how they resort to arresting their own students for refusing to toe the party line. Censorship techniques that could make Stalin blush. It’s interesting how university students are so actively in support of abortion but scared to face the a display of the outcome of abortions. In fact, you’d be hard pressed to find an example of a prominent pro-life speaker who can speak on a college campus without a bodyguard.

Please express your concerns to Carleton University directly (and let me know via the comments section or email about any response or lack thereof.)

Lin Moody
Media Relations
613-520-2600 x8705
Lin_Moody@carleton.ca

Steve Blais
Media Relations
613-520-2600 x1391
Steve_Blais@carleton.ca

What George Soros Doesn't Want You To Know

Posted on by
4

One of the things that any figure in politics has dealt with is worrying about things from their past propping up. These skeletons can be anything from cheating on a spouse to cheating on your taxes; stealing from your company, or stealing lunch money from your classmates. In the case of billionare George Soros, his skeletons involve working with the Nazis when they took over Hungary in 1944.

As Ari and I mentioned on the last episode of Strictly Right Radio, Soros is suing Canadian author, lawyer and freedom fighter Ezra Levant over a passage in a column that Levant wrote for the Sun Media Chain in response to one of George Soros’ organizations trying to thwart a Canadian media outlet, Sun TV News from starting up in Canada. The passage that Soros found most objectionable was most likely this one:

When the Nazis took total control of Hungary in 1944, the Holocaust followed. In two months, 440,000 Hungarian Jews were deported to death camps.

To survive, George, then a teenager, collaborated with the Nazis.

First he worked for the Judenrat. That was the Jewish council set up by the Nazis to do their dirty work for them. Instead of the Nazis rounding up Jews every day for the trains, they delegated that murderous task to Jews who were willing to do it to survive another day at the expense of their neighbours.

Theodore hatched a better plan for his son. He bribed a non-Jewish official at the agriculture ministry to let George live with him. George helped the official confiscate property from Jews.

By collaborating with the Nazis, George survived the Holocaust. He turned on other Jews to spare himself.

Pretty harsh words, huh? That would be horrible if Levant made that stuff up. Fortunately, he was just taking this bit of Soros’ past from stuff Georgie boy himself said in an interview on 60 Minutes in 1998. When pressed further, he even offered up this gem, “I had no sense of guilt.”

What Soros’ goons have to gain from wanting to stop a politically incorrect news network from forming in Canada is beyond me. Avaaz.org has been a known shell organization for various liberal causes, with no reason to be in Canada. I wonder if thwarting conservative efforts abroad is just to counter the boredom that Soros is facing with no Nazis to collaborate with.

The Sounds of the Silenced

Posted on by
3

The official sponsors of the famous Ann Coulter Canadian tour are continuing to promote the cause to bring back free speech to Canada. Now, International Free Press Society – Canada is bringing Connie and Mark Fournier of popular conservative messageboard FreeDominion, victims of censorship by a government agency, to speak about their startling experience with the Canadian Human Rights Commission.

Happy Anti-Something Day!

Posted on by
4

Once again, another day comes when we are supposed to united together and condemn or support an idiotic Leftist cause. Today, May 17th, that day is “International Day Against Homophobia.” (Presumably based on the U.N.’s record of irony, Iran was likely appointed the leading country for this cause.) As a pundit of sorts, generally my role is to take a somewhat coherent quote by a liberal, point out how idiotic it is, and then enjoy the rest of my day. The stupidity behind this day speaks for itself, however:

Few minority groups have been as discriminated against as the gays and lesbians. But major breakthroughs have occurred, and homosexual people are stepping out of the shadows.

Firstly, I hope that no homosexual person ever steps out of the shadows when I’m walking by…that could be a little creepy. Secondly, this is is a statement that proves Ann Coulter to be correct once again. As she said in a recent speech, “gays wish they were black.” Over and over again the gay community pretends that they have been forced into slavery (not counting the times they voluntarily get chained down,) were subject to gays-only water fountains,  had to overcome “homosexuals need not apply” signs, and ultimately that they have experienced and continued to experience some sort of systemic discimination that borders on genocide.

With the exception of gay marriage, there does not remain a single iota of evidence that gays experience any sort of discrimination from a governmental or political level. Of course, anyone who declares that they don’t think there needs to be an anti-homophobia day will, of course, be labeled as a homophobe. However, there remains a huge difference between supporting a goal and supporting a smoke-and-mirrors approach to attempting to achieve that goal.

I support any individual’s right to be gay, that doesn’t mean I think the government should pay $500,000 for a gay pride parade.

I condemn anyone who commits an act of violence against a person for their sexuality; but I don’t believe those instances should be used as an excuse to push through ineffective “hate crimes” legislation.

I oppose gay marriage because I believe that the government should be completely removed from marriage altogether; that doesn’t mean that I don’t support the right for gays to engage in civil unions or common-law partnerships.

To create a special day for an issue accomplishes nothing but gives people a platform to create for themselves a victim identity. As an incremental approach, I think we should just rename April 1st “Whiny Victim’s Day” and let all groups who perceive themselves to be victims get it out at once so that the other 364 days of the year can be filled with people not being pathetic.

Silly rabbit, proms are for straight people

Posted on by
16

H/T to RightGirl for this one.

There are a few adjectives I’m considering using for this post: clever, mean, petty, frigging hilarious? I give up, take your pick.

I was trying to find an old post to link this to, but apparently I never actually wrote about it. So, here’s the jist: 17-year old lesbian extraordinaire Constance McMillen wanted to attend her prom at Itawamba County School in Mississippi with a female date, and she wanted to wear a tuxedo instead of those lovely dresses that end up wrinkled in a heap on the floor of the empty science classroom a hotel. So, the girl feels she’s being discriminated against and goes to the ACLU, who tells the school that they can’t make her act straight, nor can they ban her from the prom. Then, the school gives up and cancels it, which apparently wasn’t allowed either, so they put it back on.

Now, the story has taken a bit of an interesting turn.

From The Advocate: (No, I had never heard of it either…)

To avoid Constance McMillen bringing a female date to her prom, the teen was sent to a “fake prom” while the rest of her class partied at a secret location at an event organized by parents.

McMillen tells The Advocate that a parent-organized prom happened behind her back — she and her date were sent to a Friday night event at a country club in Fulton, Miss., that attracted only five other students. Her school principal and teachers served as chaperones, but clearly there wasn’t much to keep an eye on.

[...]

Two students with learning difficulties were among the seven people at the country club event, McMillen recalls.

Okay firstly, the school in question is a public school, so I really don’t think they should have been able to discriminate against this girl based on her lifestyle choice. I disagree with her, but I respect her right to freedom of expression. That being said, I also respect the rights of the other students at the school and their parents, and their right to set up a privately-sponsored, separate event that was taking place at the same time. The principal and a few teachers were in attendance to chaperone the country club prom — is it their responsibility if no one shows up?

I must admit, however, that I find it amusing that Miss Holier-Than-Thou-Lesbian feels the need to point out that there were two developmentally-challenged people in attendance of the country club prom. Is she saying that she feels they weren’t worthy of her presence?

If anyone involves themselves in this situation legally apart from the students at the school and the lesbian, a scary precedent will be set for being able to sue people for not inviting you to a party. If that’s the case, then seriously, I’m making a killing off of everyone I went to high school with.

Students Uncover Racist Pastime!

Posted on by
4

It’s about time. Students at Queens University in Canada have uncovered the truth about sumo suits:

Sumo suits are instruments of ‘racism and oppression’.

Brandon Sloan, the communications officer for the Alma Mater Society, stated the obvious: white privilege had blinded the student government.

Even better, in a report published by the Canadian Federation of Students (communist student union), a student intellectual reported that white privilege permeates the ’walls, books, classrooms and everything that makes Queen’s what it is.”

What idiots. The sumo suit has existed as an attraction at events for years. Yet these oversensitive liberals are insisting on banning these suits because they now deem them ‘oppressive’.

But there’s more.

Just last year Queen’s came up with a solution to prevent troublesome free speech: a speech police program.

The speech police consisted of a group of moral superiors who would walk through public areas and listen for unpopular/conservative speech. Upon identifying unpopular speech, they would work tirelessly to purge it from the school.

It looks like stupidity is a chronic condition at Queen’s.

Queen’s was forced to cancel the program after the school received national criticism for attacking free speech. Now they’re at it again by banning sumo suits.

With all of this, are you surprised Ann Coulter was forced to cancel her appearance at the University of Ottawa? The conclusion is obvious: free speech no longer exists in Canada.

In other news, Queen’s closed the nomination process for its ‘Anti-Oppression Award’ on Monday. I nominate the idiot that first revealed how oppressive sumo suits are.

You can read the official statement explaining the racist nature of sumo suits here.

Guest Post: Why we need free speech

Posted on by
2

Guest Blog Post by Luca Colasanto

Why We Need Free Speech

It seems that in recent years Free Speech has become an issue in Canada, and for that matter, much of the Western World. Many would say that we need an absolutist approach to free speech, while others would say we should only have free speech for people holding certain views. While censors try to seem reasonable by saying things such as “freedom of speech, but only to an extent,” free speech, in the end, is only free if it is free for all.

Unfortunately there has been a false dichotomy set up by the censors. They claim that they only want to censor speech that is dangerous, such as hate speech (whatever that means.) It would appear that censors really only want to target people like holocaust deniers and racists in order to make sure that no one acts on these beliefs. I actually disagree with this paradigm. In fact, I think that the only way to stop things like hate speech are to have absolute freedom of  speech.

Most of the violence in human history has been committed by governments, authoritarian governments to be exact. While it is noble for censors to not want a repeat of the holocaust, they should take note that it was the socialist German government, and not the German citizenry that killed so many Jews.

This is mainly a result of the fact that politicians tend to more be ideological than the citizens they are supposed to represent. Sure, there are some politicians that are only involved for power, but for the most part it is safe to say that politicians have an underlying philosophy that they think society should live by. In contrast, average citizens are far more pragmatic. As a result, democracy tends to have a very moderating affect on the ability of ideological politicians to enact their whims as law.

Notable socialist Benito Mussolini even lamented the fact that democracy tended to make it difficult to bring forth radical legislation. The fact that governments tend to be more radical and discriminatory than the citizens are is quite clear when you look at history. Blacks were able to have jobs and run business in both the United States and South Africa well before they had political rights. Authoritarian governments are responsible for the holocaust, gulags, La Cabana, imprisoning journalists, genocide in Rwanda, shutting down news stations, confiscating political materials, killing political opponents, and generally limiting political, economic and religious rights. What all these authoritarian regimes have in common is that they regulate free speech. While democracies are not perfect, they did lead the way in establishing more robust human rights, and making them more universal.

Now, you might think that the censors are really only targeting the very authoritarian ideals that I am criticizing. What we see empirically however is that democracies, with free speech, had strong “idea markets”. Basically, if citizens are privy to as much information as possible, and the widest array of views then it becomes difficult for radical ideas to take hold. In fact, the market of ideas is incredibly effective at weeding out ideas like racism or intolerance. If we really want these radical ideas marginalized, then the best way to do it is to publicly pit them against better ones. Pit eugenics against reproductive rights. Pit segregation against integration. The radicals will be denounced more quickly, but also more peacefully than any legislation ever can.

As a result, as a society we need to make sure that the market for ideas is strong and protected. This is the only way that we can temper the often hateful and discriminatory ideas that radical politicians are prone to have. A thoughtful editorial or book will win more hearts and minds than a law ever will. Myself, I’d prefer a society with a few racists and holocaust deniers where I would never be afraid to speak freely than one that had no racists and holocaust deniers, but where I would be afraid to publicly share my views. If you disagree, then please say so, so that as a society we can weed out the less useful idea.

Ann Coulter sets the record straight on SR Radio

Posted on by
4

Andrew Lawton and Ari Fine welcome Ann Coulter back to the show yet again to set the record straight about her cancelled speech in Ottawa. As well, a rousing discussion on free speech, liberalism and healthcare.

You can listen online here or subscribe to the podcast in iTunes