Republicans and free speech

thaiboxerken said:
The GOP hasn't changed much in 8 years, except to maybe cater more to the Religious Right and to become more arrogant.
Click to expand...
I disagree with you, Ken.

The GOP went nuts on entitlement spending after Newt left, and after BushCo arrived. That is a significant change in GOP ways. Not saying that Newt could have prevented that, but that is the direction GOP changed.

The pandering to Religious Right is also a change, in terms of blatancy.

DR
 
RandFan said:
That said, I will agree that those Democrats who want to restrict speech are more narrow in the speech they want to restrict than those Republicans who want to restrict speech.
Click to expand...

People claiming that Democrats are for free speech and against government censorship, and Republicans aren't should chech out the voting record of their congresscritters, national and state, on subjects like the CDA/COPA, "obscenity" laws, "hate" speech laws, and so on. Also look at their support for speech codes at universities receiving government money, book banning by libraries and schools, etc. I think you'll find very little practical difference.
 
Just because I'm curious - are there any politicans from either side of the aisle that are unabashedly in favor of free of speech and actively work against any kind of legislation limiting it?
 
Probably not, senor, but there is one president who has limited where and how people can protest against him.
 
So are you saying that it's ok for a president to limit where and how people protest simply because other presidents have done so?
 
Tmy said:
I had this argument wh some righty over free speech and Kramers rant.
I always find it funny when republicans bring up free speech. Then a theory hit me.

The only time righties bring up free speech is when they are defending some bigot. Am I wrong?
Click to expand...
Almost no one in the US seems to understand the concept of "free speech" and how important it is for a democratic state. Witness the lack of support when Denmark was in the fire recently.
 
thaiboxerken said:
So are you saying that it's ok for a president to limit where and how people protest simply because other presidents have done so?
Click to expand...
The real question is when did *you* take over the thaiboxerken logonid, 'cause you don't post at all like the original. You, sir or madam as the case might be, appear to have a bit of sense that was sadly lacking in the original version.
 
Just because you happen to agree with my last post doesn't mean that the posts you don't agree with actually don't make sense. In fact, I might consider it an insult that you actually think my posts make sense because you don't make sense 99.9% of the time.
 
DanishDynamite said:
Almost no one in the US seems to understand the concept of "free speech" and how important it is for a democratic state. Witness the lack of support when Denmark was in the fire recently.
Click to expand...

You mean the Muhammad cartoons? Not sure what support or lack of it you are talking about. It got a lot of attention here in Seattle and it was discussed at length.
 
steverino said:
You mean the Muhammad cartoons? Not sure what support or lack of it you are talking about. It got a lot of attention here in Seattle and it was discussed at length.
Click to expand...
Yes, I mean the Muhammed Cartoons. Newspapers and governments in Europe were openly in support of what the Danish newspaper did.

Barely a peep from the "model of democracy for the world", i.e the US. Officially or otherwise.

Set my understanding of the world into perspective.
 
DanishDynamite said:
Yes, I mean the Muhammed Cartoons. Newspapers and governments in Europe were openly in support of what the Danish newspaper did.

Barely a peep from the "model of democracy for the world", i.e the US. Officially or otherwise.

Set my understanding of the world into perspective.
Click to expand...


And a lot of us were incredibly p*ssed off about it. I still have a support Denmark screen saver on my computer at work.
 
DanishDynamite said:
Yes, I mean the Muhammed Cartoons. Newspapers and governments in Europe were openly in support of what the Danish newspaper did.

Barely a peep from the "model of democracy for the world", i.e the US. Officially or otherwise.

Set my understanding of the world into perspective.
Click to expand...

WHat are you on crack? All but the euroweenie lefties here in the states were enjoying the cartoons very much thank you. When our libberwhack news media would let us see them of course
 
What? A private newspaper decided what content they'd print? Freedom of speech shouldn't mean that a person can force others to print their material.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom