Thursday, October 21, 2010

Vote: Free speech or political correctness

Democrat Commentator Juan Williams was fired today from National Public Radio because he went on the O'Reilly and gave his personal opinion about sitting on an airplane with people who give the presentation of terrorist.

He said, "Look, Bill, I'm not a bigot. You know the kind of books I've written about the civil rights movement in this country. But when I get on the plane, I got to tell you, if I see people who are in Muslim garb and I think, you know, they are identifying themselves first and foremost as Muslims, I get worried. I get nervous."

He was fired because he said what he believed in. He got fired because had an opinion and he spoke it, which is exactly what the first amendment protects: the right to free speech.

NPR has been accused many times of being liberal, and only supporting the news that tends to support liberal ideas. Of course we know that the whole idea behind liberalism is enforcing their ideas and beliefs, even when programs to enforce their ideas and beliefs go against the Constitution.

Thus, they do not necessarily support the Constitution. They believe the Constitution gets in the way of what they want to do. So it only makes sense that Williams, an opinion commentator, would be fired for saying exactly what many Americans would say.

So, according to NPR, radio commentators aren't allowed to speak as normal Americans. We can only say what is politically correct to say. If we say something that is not politically correct, people will be punished. We will be bullied and intimidated to only say what people on the left, the so called experts, decide is right and not offensive to anyone.

That's exactly what liberals want, for people to be punished for saying things that they believe are not good. If liberals decide something is offensive, then you can't say it. So, since we shouldn't hear anything that might link Muslims with terrorists, then those who say such things should be punished.

Williams was on the O'Reilly Factor because Bill said on the View that Muslims attacked us on 9-11 and therefore people do not want a Muslim mosque on ground Zero. Bill was saying exactly what most Americans are thinking, what 70% of Americans are thinking. He supported this with national polling. Yet because what he said was not politically correct according to the left, two members of the View stormed off angered.

Yes, O'Reilly challenged the views of two members of the view, so Bill is therefore evil and guilty of hate speech against Muslims. Yet Bill is right. Williams is right. They have a right to free speech. They have a right to not be politically correct.

Yet since not being politically correct is the antithesis of the progressive/liberal ideal world where there is only politically correctness, where we are all at peace, where there are no evil people, where all Muslims are good people and all Christians are good people and terrorism is a bad word. Those who aren't politically correct are shunned as evil.

Thus, when Whoopi Goldberg and Joy Behar had their "views" challenged, they became angered and stormed off stage.

So Bill had Williams on his show to see if Williams agreed with Bill, and even while Williams is a liberal himiself, he said he did agree with Bill. Williams said what Bill said on the view about Muslims was simply the average American opinion. Williams agreed that it was.

In fact, O'Reilly later noted that what he said on the view, and what Williams said on the O'Reilly factor, weren't opinions at all, but simply American thought. He said it's a fact 11 terrorists blew up the Twin Towers that day, and all 11 terrorists were Muslim. Therefore, it is correct to say Muslims blew up the Twin Towers.

So what are we allowed to say. If Kieth Oberman's show was attacked by the left and he was told he couldn't do his show anymore, Glenn Beck would be right there defending him because, even though Beck disagrees with Oberman's liberal views, Beck does believe Oberman has a God given right to speak out.

Yet would Oberman, a professed progressive, come to the defense of Glenn Beck when people try to shut him up because he is conservative and capitalist. I doubt it. I doubt it because Oberman is a progressive, a man who only want socialist views to be known. Those who oppose socialism are to be shut up. That's how it is in a socialist (ideal) world.

And that's exactly why Williams was shut up and fired by NPR (coincidentally, a day after Media Matters accepted 1.8 million dollars from liberal George Soros. Money it never should have accepted, especially since it also receives money from the public.)

This is a perfect example of how liberals like to bully and intimidate those they do not agree with. They fired Williams, and they shun O'Reilly, and they talk as though Fox News is irrelevent, and they try to shut up conservative talk radio with a return of the fairness doctrine.

This is a totalitarian tactic of the left to shut down those they don't agree with.

So what world do we want to live it? Do we want to live in a capitalist world of free speech, or do we want to live in a socialist world of political correctness?

The problem is, conservatives debate openly in the arena of ideas, and yet those of the progressive philosophy try to spread their ideas secretly. While conservatives will acknowledge they are conservative, liberals will usually deny they are liberals.

Yet most Americans are well aware of what liberals are trying to do, and who they are. And that's why republicans are leading in the polls right now. And out in the open, Americans will choose -- or better -- capitalism and free speech.

Either that, or bloggers like me -- like you -- might be forced off the net.

To view the clip of O'Reilly on the View, click here.

No comments: