Piers Morgan Attacks 1st Amendment after Attacking 2nd Amendment


Noted Constitutional scholar Piers Morgan, CNN’s pathetic replacement for Larry King, enjoys telling Americans how much of the Bill of Rights he doesn’t want them to have.

It’s like having a living reminder of why we had a revolution in the first place in the last place on CNN’s last place network.

There are few people who genuinely believe in an absolute First Amendment, but don’t believe in the Second Amendment. Despite myths to the contrary, the ACLU doesn’t believe in an absolute First Amendment. They do take strategic cases that give people that impression.

Piers Morgan, coming out of a European milieu, where there are no absolute rights and freedom of speech is subject to politically correct censorship, has nothing to restrain him except the humility he doesn’t have.


Morgan’s preening assertion is instructive. He doesn’t care for “assault rifles,” so he thinks they should be banned for everyone else. He doesn’t enjoy “vile bigotry,” so his instinct is to strip constitutional protections from people whose words cross that line — as defined by Piers Morgan, of course.

But that’s what we’re dealing with here. It’s a zero sum game for total control of public spaces. The First Amendment was meant to protect the neutrality of public spaces.

Liberals are fine with it when they don’t have the commanding heights of public spaces. When they do, then it’s time to ban anyone who disagrees.



  • edlancey

    We don’t want him back.

  • rbprice

    But Piers, you are a vile bigot yourself! Why do you condemn yourself? It’s easy, because like all left-wing, wide-eyed progressives, you are a self-loathing narcissist.

  • Race_Dissident

    The bloody idiot. Doesn’t he realize the First Amendment is designed precisely to protect the speech of “vile bigots” and others whose unpopular speech could otherwise be squelched? The pious Piers of the world, who make their living by uttering treacly platitudes that reassure the powerful do not require First Amendment protection because nobody in power disagrees with them. Must be nice.

  • truebearing

    Once again the Left is warping the meaning of words to suit their relentless agenda. “Vile” is defined as: abhorrent, despicable, morally offensive, repulsive. Robertson’s comments fit none of the words that define “vile.” The definition does, however, frequently fit comments made by the Left, and the hysterical homo-tyrants.
    In their never ending quest to destroy Judeo-Christian morality, the Left is repeating, ad nauseam, their latest mantra — “vile” — in association with Robertson’s citing of moral judgements from the Bible. When pressed on whether they are saying the Bible is bigoted, they refuse to directly answer, preferring to smear biblical teachings more indirectly. Their intent is not merely to say the Bible is bigoted, it the teachings therein are evil.

    The word “vile” has an inescapably moral context. On what moral code is the Left basing their use of the word? Martin Bashir thinks someone should defecate and urinate in Sarah Palin’s mouth. Obvious from the lack of leftist outrage, that didn’t violate their “morality” or bring cries of “vile bigotry.” It seems, in fact, that the Left has no moral code, only a selective and twisted application of Judeo-Christian morality, whenever it can be used against those who believe in it. They use our beliefs, once sufficiently twisted, to defeat us. We need to be vigilant in exposing the lies and deception in their linguistic perversion. We have to challenge them on every level, including every word that is bastardized in their attempts to overthrow truth and goodness.

    Vile…evil…the former describes the utterances of those who are the latter. Vile speech comes from an evil heart, as the Left has so abundantly proven.

  • John

    Piers Morgan ???? the guy that babbles for the worst news TV station in the US?? Maybe he should buy a one way ticket back to socialist UK and join the muslims freedom fighters over there….. I noticed that even Cooper is slowly moving away from CNN. Of course they brought back Anapour a liberal thinker and her twisted mind.. Maybe Lemon is the only one who some times goes against the CNN liberal carbage…. I often wonder of CNN is owned by Al Jezeera for it spends more time on some unimportant news then on what is happening in the USA…. CNN’s Piers Morgan,,,,,a social humanist with lots of talk but says nothing…. a loose cannon…..

  • worldwatchman

    He would look best in England. Go home you piece of ****.

    • A Z

      Martin Bashir was sent packing, maybe we burn up the phone lines so CNN gives Piers his pink slip.

      Martin Bashier BTW Born in London to Pakistani Christian parents is a committed Christian.

      At least that is what he told the Guardian newspaper. you would think a Christian of Pakistani origins would have an agenda to protect Pakistani Christians.

      I think his real religion is Liberalism.

      • http://www.barrykidd.com/ Barry Kidd

        Burning up the phone lines won’t get him out of CNN. If fact it could keep him there as controversy in medi is, more often than not a good thing. The only way to get him out is to simply never turn to CNN and even more important his broadcast.

        The only thing the talks louder than money is the lack of money.

        • A Z

          Your correct. But with no rating, bad publicity and still no upward swing in rating you would think they would fire him. But you are right, they would dig in their heels.

        • defcon 4

          If the Crescent News Network was the only channel on television, I wouldn’t watch television at all.

  • laura r

    the word is PROGRESSIVE. liberal is an old term, they werent so bad those days.

  • ZZ

    Piers Morgan? People follow his tweets? Why? So they can criticize the stupid things he writes?

    Who are the “vile bigots” he mentioned? The malicious and intolerant members of GLAD who want to destroy the livlihood of the Duck Dad because he said something they don’t like?

    It isn’t even a First Ammendment issue but Morgan stupidly used it as an excuse to. attack speech he doesn’t like – and a religion he doesn’t like. Last time I checked, the Bible and the Duck Dudes are a lot more popular than GLAD or Morgan. And the AE network screwed up big time by trying to suspend the Duck Dad. Not a lot of hipsters, angry activists or CNN hosts watch Duck Dynasty but plenty of normal people do. It’s one of the most popular programs on tv, and unlike the bigots attacking it, the Duck family are very likeable people.

  • defcon 4

    Without the 2nd amendment vile, fascist pigs like Morgan et. al. would take away our 1st amendment rights in a heartbeat, for our own good, social justice, to prevent “islamophobia” etc.

  • defcon 4

    I remember when this limey coward interviewed Robert Blake, you could tell he was scared of a senior citizen who could, in all probability, beat him like a dusty old carpet and refused to play into his leading questions.

  • glpage

    Piers Morgan is a subject, he was raised as a subject, his formative years were spent in a system where there are subjects and rulers. I doubt he has any clue what the people who rebelled and won their freedom from the system that produces people like him believed in and why they decided to create a system of citizens.

  • Scottar

    Go back to England you POS

    • defcon 4

      He should go live in Tower Hamlets where he can enjoy the multicultural diversity of the UK to the fullest.

    • patriot 86

      Well said .Why doesnt this pos go over to russia and try excercising his first amenment rights by bashing the government on their ban on gays .You can bet hed be floatingt in the volga river face down before the day was out .Fucking worthless pile pf dogshit go back to england and be with the rest of the sheep.

  • john spielman

    time for CNN to merge with the shopping channel! Maybe P Morgan can be taught to sell toaster ovens and Czech crystal paper weights.

  • LDMack

    “You, Mr. Morgan, are the walking and breathing reason why we have the 1st and 2nd Amendments. You come over here, become an “authority” on our Constitution, and then proceed to exercise the 1st Amendment Free Speech clause to tell everyone else to shut up? You are a smokin’ hypocrite. The 1st Amendment does protect ‘vile bigots,’ Mr. Morgan; just look in the mirror #Piers Morgan.”

  • Svigor

    I can’t imagine the sort of trauma experienced during the formative years, or the sort of congenital defects inherent beforehand, that would be involved in imparting the sense of entitlement required to go to another country and routinely lecture millions of its citizens that they had too much freedom.

    It boggles the normal person’s mind.

    But then, it’s an open secret that media types are higher on measures of sociopathy than the general public.

    But this is probably shifting the blame, which rightly lies upon the American citizenry, which has not yet tarred and feathered this man, and sent him out of town on a rail.

  • Difster

    Finding the practice of dudes boning each other up the backside to be vile does not make one a vile bigot.

  • Anukem Jihadi

    Piers Morgan obviously believes it should cover hoax photos though. He lost his job at the Daily Mirror for the right to publish them I think. What the 1st and 2nd Amendments cover are not nearly as important to Piers as his innate ability to decide what people should or shouldn’t see. Even if it is made up.

  • avlisk

    The 1st Amendment isn’t there to protect only happy, pleasant words that we all find agreeable. That would be a waste of paper. It’s there to protect unsavory and vile words that we don’t like. Otherwise, what’s the point. Piers and his ilk have shown their ignorance of the 2nd Amendment, and now, his ignorance of the 1st. Ignorant people, like Piers (and most Liberals, I hasten to add), should educate themselves before they speak about these things.

    • patriot 86

      Yes it is friend and were the only place in the world where it exists .I am so blessed to be a american and free .

  • mickey_meador

    This country is facing a Constitutional crisis: a large segment of population of the country primarily located in the overcrowded cities think that the moral basis that upon which our country was founded on are no longer relevant. Myopic inbred educated liberals are self righteous and have lost the ability listen to reasonable discussion. The 1st and 2nd Amendments were logically established for the protection of we the people. And the majority of Amendments we well thought out as well. Not until the leftist politicians gain power dis we have ill intended Amendments added that are not standing reason and the test of time.
    If we don’t stand and defend the “God” given rights we are doomed to fail as a nation. We presently see these right under liberal attack and we will see the others being challenged as well: unlawful search and seizure, federal ursurpation over states rights, stationing of federal troops within private property to ‘maintain order’ and many others.
    I urge you all to review the Bill of Rights and Stand and Fight to defend them.