It’s been suggested by some media pundits that Dick and Liz Cheney abruptly cancelling their appearance at an upcoming speaking engagement in Toronto due to “security concerns” the other day was nothing more than a publicity stunt to rollover existing ticket holders and hype the “Steynemite!” event featuring controversial author Mark Steyn and another loopy English ex-pat, Michael Coren. Certainly not a theory beyond the realm of plausibility…
Somewhat aside from that, it’s amusing that both Steyn and Coren vehemently promote themselves as champions of free speech – as do their legion of so-called “conservative” supporters, such as SDAMatt2a, the “owner” of the above-noted video. But in reality, do these folks actually “walk the walk” when it comes to the matter of free speech? In my experience, they most certainly do not:
That’s just one glaring example, but I could produce countless more where these phony advocates for free speech don’t practice what they preach.
By the way, I’m not sure why I got “blocked” by this particular individual. I think I made a couple of comments that took issue with remarks made by others, but it was nothing terribly heinous – certainly not of the calibre that would warrant being “blocked” from his channel. Some people, it seems, just can’t tolerate dissenting opinions. Apparently, their idea of “free speech” is limited to that which aligns with their own point of view.
The unaffiliated (definitely not co-ordinating with Stephen Colbert) SuperPAC “Americans for a Better Tomorrow, Tomorrow” has just released the following advertisement, which logically proposes that if “corporations are people” then Mitt Romney should be regarded as a serial killer…
The way Colbert has methodically gone about illustrating on his show over the past several months the absurd ramifications of the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision has been absolutely brilliant. Now linking that effort to also ridicule the insane legal fiction of corporate personhood takes things to a whole new level.
I don’t know why anybody would be in the least bit shocked that “Conservative partisans deliberately drowned out a journalist’s question to Mr. Harper.” Aside from being suitable wallpaper for whatever tiresome speech du jour the Dear Leader may happen to be delivering about [insert favourably poll-tested issue here], what other purpose the pre-screened, pre-approved members of the party faithful in [name of target swing riding] are meant to serve?
Quite frankly, I’m surprised that Terry Milewski was able to get out the first part of his rather lengthy and involved question without being shouted down by mindless chants of “Harper! Harper! Harper! Harper!” Guess the party operatives were a little slow off the mark at flipping the switch on their remotes in this instance.
Allen Asch (aka “LiberalViewer”) presents a very cogent counter-argument to the widely held perception that the recent SCOTUS decision fundamentally corrupts democracy.
I’m still not entirely convinced that the SCOTUS decision isn’t a perniciously harmful one — only time will tell on that score, I guess. But what’s more troubling are the questions that it failed to address when it comes to the distinctions between political free speech the influence of money on the democratic process.
Update: Murray Hill Inc. — The Best Democracy Money Can Buy!
It’s hard not to be somewhat amused by the deranged lunacy of Stephen Taylor’s newest and most energetic right-wing kook who leads off her spirited defense of ex-governor and failed VP candidate Sarah Palin with this boast:
Most of the comments I get never see the light of day because I am the mistress of my blog, the queen of my domain and the executioner of comments that are spiteful and nonsensical or simply those I do not like.
Really? A review of her past 20 posts indicates that she’s received a grand total of 3 comments; presumably the one’s she’s not executed for being disagreeable in some way or other — you know, being the dominatrix “queen of [her] domain” and all. Same deal with the previous 20 posts — a whopping 3 comments.
Good luck with that.
I’m sure we’ll be hearing howls of protest from the valiant defenders of free speech that populate the ranks of the Bloggin’ Tories about the Harper government banning British MP George Galloway from entering the country to speak at an anti-war event in Toronto on the grounds that he’s “infandous”… Seeing as the usual suspects worked themselves up into a lather of outrage over Britain denying Gert Wilders entry into that country because of his anti Muslim views, I’m sure they’ll be just as upset at this. I mean, it’s not like they’re all a bunch of two-faced, hypocritical slimebags or anything…
By the way, “infandous” is a pretty rich accusation coming from an odious prick like Jason Kenney, especially so given that just this week the Harper government reprehensibly flouted our own laws by allowing a suspected war criminal into the country to address a well-heeled audience of conservative supporters in Calgary.
Oh, and another thing… Doesn’t it seem more than a little odd that Galloway can speak before the U.S. Congress, but isn’t allowed entry into Canada?
Carole Kreck, a 61 year librarian, wanted to attend the John McCain town hall meeting being held yesterday at the Denver Center for Performing Arts. The event was billed as being open to the public and people were advised to arrive a few hours early.
While waiting in line, Kreck was approached by McCain’s security detail who told her to leave. When she refused, the police were called. They issued her a ticket for trespassing and escorted her from the premises.
And what was the problem with the 61 yr. old librarian?
She was carrying a sign that said: McCain = Bush.
Talk about subversive.