Archive for the ‘internet/free speech’ Category

This line from Glenn Reynolds proves that Ed Driscoll is a genius:

But the big news is that the story is now big enough that they have to try to explain it away, or change the subject, instead of just ignoring it. That means we’ve reached Phase Two.

Why is this story big enough? Because the NAACP attacked the tea party causing coverage that put people on the right, including Black Tea Party members on the air mentioning it. And all those outlets that refused to report this story and pretended it didn’t exist suddenly became aware of it.

When even the Washington post is calling it a bombshell with a memeorandum thread, this is bad news for the dems. (Of course we can’t allow that so the Post has apparently changed the headline since the thread began).

The more idiots like Shelila Jackson Lee keep this story alive the more it will hurt both the NAACP and the left.

There is some news from Illinois via the American Papist on the Illinois firing scandal. Take a peek at the form letter they are sending out:

I learned of this action on the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign (UIUC) campus late last week and immediately asked Chancellor Robert Easter, who oversees the campus, to provide me with a briefing on the matter. I want to assure you that the University administration shares my commitment to the principles of academic freedom. At the same time, we do believe it’s important to fully investigate all of the details related to this situation. As I’m sure you’re aware, it is sometimes the case that public reports may convey only part of the story. I think it important to reserve judgment until I have all of the facts and I hope you’ll agree.

We have asked the UIUC Senate’s standing Committee on Academic Freedom and Tenure to immediately review this action. This is the mechanism on the campus through which these matters should be vetted. We expect this review to be completed very soon. By using our channels of shared governance and review, we are in the best position to make informed decisions that afford a fair process for all.

If you don’t think these guys are worried, you’re right:

Chancellor Robert Easter has asked the University of Illinois’ Senate Committee on Academic Freedom and Tenure to determine whether the university violated the academic freedom and right to free speech of adjunct professor Dr. Kenneth Howell.

Howell, who has taught in the university’s Department of Religion since 2001, was recently fired for explaining in a class on Catholicism that the Church believes that homosexual behavior violates natural moral law.

University President Michael Hogan addressed faculty senators on Monday, after receiving 100 e-mails about Howell’s case, reported The News-Gazette.

“We want to be able to reassure ourselves there was no infringement on academic freedom here,” Hogan said. “This is a very, very important, not to mention a touchy and sensitive, issue. Did this cross the line somehow?”

Why are they worried? Because they are being noticed.

Big Government has ’em.

Deneen Borelli

I’m deeply concerned that the NAACP is being used as a political tool to do the dirty work of the progressive movement. I urge blacks concerned about the tea parties to read the Contract from America — a list of policy objectives for Congress that was developed by tea party members nationwide. These objectives are clearly about limited government and liberty. In fact, the NAACP should be very concerned Obama’s cap-and-trade energy policy will lead to higher energy prices and higher unemployment – particularly among poor and minority households.

Kevin Martin:

To label peaceful political dissent as racists is akin to the behavior of the segregationists who once labeled the peaceful dissent lead by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. as troublemaking. The founders of the NAACP must be rolling in their graves at the thought that dissent against an unfair system is now considered a reason for NAACP condemnation.

R. Dozier Gray:

I wish I could be surprised that the NAACP has passed a resolution condemning the tea party movement because of alleged racism. Unfortunately, I am not. But I really just don’t get it. It’s as if simply not being totally in the Obama camp makes one automatically anti-black.

Robin Martin:

I condemn the NAACP because they are no longer advancing the cause of freedom and equality. They are instead advancing a sophomoric, short sighted, and reactionary resolution to brand the Tea Party Movement as “racist”. They act as a police group for racial bigotry but only as it pertains to black people — notice the silence of the NAACP regarding the Black Panther member’s call to bash the heads of white babies. It’s unfortunate that the NAACP has become nothing more than a divisive cabal of Black Quasi-Socialist Progressive Fundamentalist Racism Chasers who are more interested in identity politics than they are in a prosperous and free nation.

Lt. Col Allen West:

This NAACP Resolution is consistent with the Obama administration tactic of demonizing and blaming someone else for your own failures and shortcomings, and not take responsibility and accountability.

Cedra Crenshaw:

Chicago Machine Democrats claim to be the party of diversity and inclusion, yet if you are a Black, conservative Republican mother, with a professional background in accounting, supported by the tea party movement, Chicago Machine Democrats do not encourage this type of diversity. Instead they unjustly knock you off the ballot and then talk about the lack of diversity in the Republican party and the tea party movement. The NAACP plays right into this scam.

I encourage NAACP members and convention delegates to attend a tea party event and get first hand knowledge about the true purpose of the tea party movement: limited government, fiscal responsibility, and individual liberty. The NAACP needs to leave the racism where it belongs – with the Chicago Machine Democrats.

and lets finish with Marie Stoughter

What saddens me is that this organization chooses to focus on imaginary slights, while real threats to this country exist in the form of New Black Panther members who have been caught on tape intimidating voters with billy clubs. Rather than condemning this behavior, it is largely ignored by the NAACP and a presidential administration that continues to refuse to prosecute such.

The Tea Party uses “racial epithets?” I soundly condemn the NAACP for failing to rebuke the New Black Panther members for inciting racial hatred (“explicitly racist behavior”) and, yes, actually using racial epithets as evidenced by the ranting of King Samir Shabazz caught on tape.

“We’re deeply concerned about elements that are trying to move the country back, trying to reverse progress that we’ve made,” said NAACP spokeswoman Leila McDowell. “We are asking that the law-abiding members of the Tea Party repudiate those racist elements . . . that are within the Tea Party movement.”

This statement reeks of the hypocrisy that has really held this country back.

You can see on memorandum that the MSM will not talk to any of these people, it doesn’t fit the narrative.

In my post about the fatwa on Molly Norris I mentioned that wordpress put up a post asking people to support the 1st amendment through a group called 1forall and my challenge to them to support Molly. In true first amendment fashion that comment has apparently not been approved. So in keeping with the actual spirit of the 1st amendment I am reprinting it here:

Well a good way [to support the 1st amendment] would be to support Molly Norris. Islamic cleric Anwar al-Awlaki has declared a FATWA against her and called for her death for the “Everybody Draw Mohammad Day” event. I have in this post

https://datechguy.wordpress.com/2010/07/12/dear-mr-al-awlaki-i-formally-request-to-be-included-in-your-fatwa/

declared my support for Ms. Norris and requested that he include me in said FATWA because I vow to have a new such day if they succeed in killing her. She is a fellow American, worthy of our support.

You might not like the schools in Texas or the Oil companies etc or the patriot act George Bush but you risk nothing by opposing them. That’s not defending the 1st Amendment it’s cheap and false courage to give yourself a pat on the back.

If you believe in the first Amendment, you declare that it is very important for people to stand up for it. Well here is a real way to do it to put actual skin in the game.

The question is do you have the actual courage of your declared convictions or is the threat of radical Islam a bridge too far for the defense of freedom of speech?

Lets find out.

I guess we did didn’t we?