« Breaking: Supreme Court Rules on Partial Birth Abortion | Main | Indian Herbal Remedy Offers Hope In Pancreatic Cancer »

April 18, 2007

Tony Blankley: 'Imus Affair Less About Imus And More About Motives Of Attackers'

Topics: Political News and commentaries

In Tony BlankIeys' op-ed at The Washington Times today he says "The Imus affair was not about Don Imus; it was - and more importantly, is -about the motives of those who brought him down":

A "respected" liberal journalist and I were exchanging views when she said (to closely paraphrase): As long as we got Imus off the air, I don't much care how we did it.

In other words, the ends justify the means. If Imus' words are destructive, the people shouldn't hear them. Just shut him up anyway you can. Of course, the acceptance of the proposition that "bad" words or ideas should be suppressed is itself, a priori, a rejection of the principle of free speech.

But note, we need to distinguish between constitutional free speech and a culture conducive to free speech. Neither Imus, nor any of us, have a right to be published or broadcast. Constitutionally, we only have a right to stand on a street corner or otherwise self-publish our ideas and words.

But a culture that cheers on collective efforts at suppression of heresy, dissent or other unpopular words is every bit as chilling as one merely enforced by law. And there is usually a political agenda (often hidden) behind such public exhortations to suppression: Crassly silence one's political opponent in the name of public virtue. Or, as in the case of Mr. Imus, use his suppression as a chilling threat to others -- who are one's true political enemies.

... Mr. Imus used a nasty phrase, reasonably believed by many to have been hateful. His transgression was merely a convenient moment to launch an intimidating suppression campaign against other "hate speech."

But we all know that "hate speech" is in the ear of the listener.

... it is worth noting who has been defending Mr. Imus' rights. Although he is a liberal and gave his microphone over to mostly liberal journalists, it was conservatives (and out-of-the-mainstream lefties like Rosie O'Donnell and Bill Maher) who defended his right. Because we are the ones who value and need both a law and culture of free expression.

Continue reading here.

Blankely's points trumpet what many conservatives are saying, who, unlike so many "respected" liberal PC journalists, are unwilling to let the likes of the real "nappy-headed hos" - Jessie Jackson and Al Sharpton, force their personal agendas on the rest of us by being the deciders of what is and what is not free speech.

Image: "Nappy-headed political hos"

Posted by Richard at April 18, 2007 11:32 AM

Articles Related to Political News and commentaries:

• The Truth About Tuskegee And The Lie Of Black Left-wing Paranoia - May 02, 2008
• Bad News (For Democrats): Jobless Rate Falls - May 02, 2008
• Here We Go Again: Meet Obama's ''New'' Pastor - May 02, 2008
• Contrary To What Democrats And Jeremiah Wright Want Americans To Believe - May 02, 2008
• Accepting Michelle's Invitation - May 01, 2008
• On 'Wright's Wrong' And Obama's Response - May 01, 2008
• Despite Claims To The Contrary, Obama 'Did Inhale' - May 01, 2008
• The Party of Defeat - Apr 30, 2008
• Obama Counsels With New Radical Minister - Apr 30, 2008
• Obama Runs Grandmother Under The Bus, Then Runs Rev. Wright Under The Bus, Who In Turn Ran Obama Under The Bus, Who Then Ran The Bus Over The Reverend - Oh My, What A Mess! - Apr 30, 2008