The Hate Speech Inquisition

Pages: 1 2

There isn’t a shred of evidence that deranged Tucson massacre suspect Jared Loughner ever listened to talk radio or cared about illegal immigration. Indeed, after 300 exhaustive interviews, the feds “remain stumped” about his motives, according to Tuesday’s Washington Post. But that hasn’t stopped a coalition of power-grabbing politicians, progressive activists and open-borders lobbyists from plying their quack cure for the American body politic: government-sponsored speech suppression.

In the immediate aftermath of the shooting rampage, Democratic leaders mused openly about reintroducing the Orwellian “Fairness Doctrine” — a legislative sledgehammer targeting conservative viewpoints on public airwaves. New York Democratic Rep. Louise Slaughter assailed the Federal Communications Commission for failing to police broadcast content and vowed to “look into” more aggressive language monitoring. Massachusetts Democratic Rep. Ed Markey blamed “incendiary rhetoric” for triggering “unstable individuals to take violent action.” In his own manifesto calling for resurrection of the Fairness Doctrine, Democratic Rep. James Clyburn pressed public officials to “rethink parameters on free speech.”

This week’s fashionable new media meme is to deride talk radio hosts for taking these speech-squelching threats seriously. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution’s Jay Bookman sneered at the “persecution complex” of conservative broadcasters who reacted to Slaughter and company. Politico’s Keach Hagey dismissed concerns about the Democrats’ chilling campaign against right-leaning media outlets and knocked conservative talkers’ “defensive posture.” (Sound familiar? This is the same tactic they used against Sarah Palin and all those on the right falsely accused of being accessories to the Tucson massacre: Attack ‘em. Attack ‘em for responding. Accuse the smear victims of playing the victim card. Repeat.)

Make no mistake: The Hate Speech Inquisition is real. And it’s being fought on all fronts. Last week, using the non-radio-inspired Tucson massacre as fuel, the National Hispanic Media Coalition called on the FCC to gather evidence for the left’s preconceived conclusion that conservative talk radio “hate speech” causes violence.

It’s Red Queen science — sentence first, research validation later.

Pages: 1 2

  • Tar_n_Feathers

    Orwellian indeed. One need only run some of the Left's latest phrases through a newspeak translator to see in what kind of intellectual totalitarian world they would have us live. "Incendiary rhetoric?" Well, that would be any effective argument that might compel a citizen to oppose any number of kicked-in-the-head ideas the Dems want us to blindly accept.

    All of a sudden the Left has some weird and unrealistic expectation (or is it just wishful thinking?) that Americans will become docile sheep if they are sternly lectured to about the consequences of "Incendiary rhetoric" . When has that ever been the case? Like never? These political dipsticks must think we're living in Candyland.

    So there you go Ed Markey. Was that incendiary enough for you?


    If someone on the Right still has doubts that we, the People, are at a war against Leftist/Fascist totalitarian regime, and/or is shy of saying it openly, should promptly have their head examined, and then immediately enroll in the regime's "re-education camps" (Write or Call Toll Free to "Democracy Now", the Goebbellian Propagand Ministry of the Party.

  • Redbaiter

    "If someone on the Right still has doubts that we, the People, are at a war against Leftist/Fascist totalitarian regime, and/or is shy of saying it openly, should promptly have their head examined"

    Yes, you're perfectly correct, and its why I was so angry at the Republicans who signed up for this "bipartisan" seating arrangement during the State of the Union speech. The Republicans so badly need to wake up to what the real battle is about here. They have been losing for years because they still foolishly believe the Democrats have good intentions. They need to say- "You sit there and we'll sit here, for not only do we not want to sit among you, we really do not want you sitting among us." My further thoughts here.

  • USMCSniper

    In Canada, Canadian hate crime laws and the Human Rights Commissions which operate outside the courts system have been used, in the past, to silence conservatives who criticize homosexuals, multiculturalism, the politics of the left, and among other things, Islamic terrorism.

    • StephenD

      Exactly what this will lead to. After all, our President agrees with the UN and would subject the US to their proposed international law forbidding hate speech against religion. Which means anything said against or even challenging Islam would be a crime. Remember in Nazi Germany one of the first objectives was to control what was said…and heard. Remember also that once our right to disagree (speak freely) is taken, all our other rights are in the balance.