Free Speech? It's All Relative

Friend Chris Barkulis addresses this on his fine blog, "Right Not Wrong." For most of us, it means what it says: Speech that is free, unrestricted, unencumbered. Yes, some should be "banned," such as the classic example of yelling "fire" in a crowded theater. For some, however, free speech is relative. Can you guess who they are? Chris wrote: Any speech is free speech unless you're a conservative/Republican that speaks against the current administration or Democratic party. That would constitute hate speech; soon to be punishable by law in a city near you! Now, if you're a self proclaimed conservative/Republican that speaks against your own party you're safe. So don't worry if you think the Republican party needs to change itself and reassert its core principals and values. Unless of course those principles and values are not closer to the Democratic party line and what the socialists that reside within the DNC agree with. Then you're back to hate speech. ...according to Dems, when someone disagrees with them, "inner city" all of a sudden must deal with the color of someones skin in a negative term? ....if you're a Democrat and emptily champion the inner city it's healthy, positive free speech.... Could you imagine if the true residents of "inner city" areas actually heard what conservative/Republicans want for them? Things like success, business ownership, education, self sufficiency, and the list goes on. Read the full post here... Leave a Comment on our Guestbook! CommieBama Hats and More Chicago News Bench RSS Feed Follow ChiNewsBench on Twitter