When Journalists Call For An End To Free Speech

November 30, 2020

I’ll grant it’s a stretch to call CNN’s Oliver Darcy a “journalist” (though I suppose he is by the standards of Tass or Pravda), but he does work for a major news organization and he, along with all too many of his colleagues, is not just open to restrictions on free speech on the Internet (and would it stop there?), but are actively calling for them.

Attorney Jonathan Turley, himself no conservative, takes Darcy to task in a post today labeled “And Why Stop There?” What’s disturbing is not just the likes of Darcy calling for free speech restrictions, but members of the US Goverment. As Turley relates:

What is chilling about Darcy’s writings is that they reflect the view of many now in Congress and in the Democratic Party. Indeed, they reflect many in the Biden campaign. Once a party that fought for free speech, it has become the party demanding Internet censorship and hate speech laws. President-Elect Joe Biden has called for speech controls and recently appointed a transition head for agency media issues that is one of the most pronounced anti-free speech figures in the United States. It is a trend that seems now to be find support in the media, which celebrated the speech of French President Emmanuel Macron before Congress where he called on the United States to follow the model of Europe on hate speech.

And Europe is not a model we should want to follow, no matter how much Progressives give in to their Europhilia. If you want to read a good book on the dangers to free speech in Europe, let me recommend Paul Coleman’s “Censored: how European ‘free speech’ laws are threatening freedom of speech.”

The assault on free speech from the Left in government, the media, and academia is a dangerous movement for our Republic. I’m with Mr. Turley:

So put me down as preferring free speech without the helpful guards and content modification. Instead, I hold a novel idea that people can reach their own conclusions on such … disinformation just as Darcy does.

In other words, I’ll think for myself, thank you.


In which Newt eviscerates CNN’s John King

January 20, 2012

There’s no other way to describe it: John King, moderating last night’s debate in Charleston, SC, opened with a question about salacious allegations made by Gingrich’s second ex-wife. The former Speaker then gutted King and the MSM in front of the entire nation, calling them out for their biased coverage. It was a thing of beauty, an instant classic. The only thing missing was King falling to his knees in tears to beg for mercy.

Enjoy, my friends:

Now, I’m not much of a fan in Gingrich, though I admire his intellectual acuity; he has a lot of good ideas (and a lot of bad ones). But, were he to become the nominee, I would so look forward to the debates with Obama. The president would be reduced to a quivering mound of Jello.

And I’d need extra popcorn.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


CNN plumbs new depths in spinelessness

January 18, 2011

…by apologizing for a guest using the word “crosshairs.” I kid you not:

Click the image to watch the video, but here’s the transcript:

“Before we go to break, I want to make a quick point. We were having a discussion about the Chicago mayoral race. My friend Andy Shaw used the term ‘in the crosshairs’ in talking about the candidates. We’re trying, we’re trying to get away from that language. Andy is a good friend, he’s covered politics for a long time, but we’re trying to get away from that kind of language.”

Great. Let’s keep the false idea alive that violent (read: “Right-wing”) rhetoric was somehow responsible for an apolitical nut committing mass-murder at a Tucson shopping center. What’s next, John? Apologizing for showing Sarah Palin’s image, just in case the mere sight of her incites violence? Are you guys going to post a disclaimer with reruns of “Crossfire?”

Just when I thought my nausea-meter for political correctness couldn’t go any higher, CNN finds a way to red-line it.

via Allahpundit