Free Speech’s Two Faces: Liberal Honesty vs Hypocricy

March 9, 2012


Free speech has two faces in the liberal world today:   Honesty and Hypocrisy. Below are two call outs from each face.

One call out is authored by an accomplished, respected, professional; the other comes from an angry, hateful amateur.

One debates his liberal political philosophy in the arena of ideas, the other just wants to censor and silence opposing words.

One has served two Presidents, (a Democrat and Republican), and is the principal in his D.C. law firm, the other has succumbed to the hypocrisy and hate of the far, far left.

One is an honest adversary, true to his liberal ideology, the other but a hyper-hypocrite wandering in the wasteland of emptiness.

One is Mr. Lanny Davis, the other is our local village blithiot, DwainbwainGraham, a.k.a. the Erstwhile Conservative. One is honest, one is not, can you tell which is which?

Number one:

What Limbaugh said about Sandra Fluke — calling her a “slut” and “prostitute” because she supports mandatory healthcare insurance coverage for contraception — is so stupid and insulting that even Rush had to apologize … in his non-apologetic kind of way…………….

……OK — there, I did it. I broke my usual rule and used lots of adjectives and name-calling about Limbaugh. I just exercised my First Amendment rights. So now, please, Rush — attack me back. Let’s have it out — in the marketplace of ideas and words created and protected by the First Amendment. So why don’t I feel good about all my fellow liberals piling on Limbaugh for his misogynist comments?

Because of the First Amendment………

………………I remember my dad telling me stories about the danger of Joe McCarthy in the 1950s — when Sen. McCarthy would cause actors to be blacklisted, and executives to be fired, and boycotts of businesses to be organized, because he had labeled someone a “pinko” or, worse, a “liberal.”………….I worry about thought police, ideas police, people who decide they don’t like your opinion and rather than making a counterargument and fighting it out in the “marketplace of ideas” — as liberals have long believed the First Amendment is all about — try to get you fired, or boycott your business, or boycott those who do business with you, or those who do business with those who do business with you, etc………

You get my point…………I hope………..So Rush — I strongly disagree with your politics, your ideas, and especially with the disgusting and disrespectful way you described Sandra Fluke.

But I defend your right to be wrong — and hope my fellow liberals resist acting like a liberal version of the McCarthyism my dad deplored.

Number two:

I’d forgotten that The Rush Limbaugh Show is heard on the American Forces Network (he used to brag about it and I don’t know how I forgot that) and something should be done to stop it. There is a petition available to do just that.

Enough with the booshwa from Sen. Carl Levin, Democratic chairman of the powerful Armed Services Committee, who said,

“……I think that is probably an issue that should be left to the folks that run that network. In other words, I’d love to see them drop it but I don’t think I’d legislate it.”

Oh, yeah? You mean it is okay that our men and women in uniform hear a blowhard know-nothing tell them that their Commander-in-Chief hates America and wants to destroy it? What the hell are you doing running the Armed Service Committee, Senator Levin, if you aren’t willing to insist that the AFN drop this nasty and poisonous schmuck immediately?

It is outrageous.

There is no disagreement from the Corner that what Limbaugh said was inappropriate and over the top. But there is plenty of disagreement with the liberal McCarthy-ites who are now actively promoting the silencing of Limbaugh.

The tones of the columns above illustrate the difference between the adults and children of the liberal movement and lays bare the hypocrisy of the far left Daily Kos hate crowd.

While the Kos crowd will be wrong 100 percent of the time the same cannot be said for the adult “Mr. Honest” liberals.

For while the Corner no doubt will disagree on most political issues of the day, when it comes to the Constitution there are surprisingly many areas where the conservative and “honest” liberal philosophies live together on common ground.

And perhaps the most fertile of that common ground is the First Amendment.

We all know Voltaire’s: “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” Such is the attitude of true conservatives and liberals alike.

But the far, far left today prefers: “I disagree with what you say and I will go to my death defending every way possible to silence you.”

Mr. Honest will defend your right to free speech; Mr. Hypocrite will destroy you for exercising that right if it not be his “approved” speech.

And yes, for you paying attention, you are correct; the Corner has not identified which call-out was written by which author.

Said omission of attribute is with intentional purpose:

If you can’t figure it out on your own, you don’t belong here.

You instead need to muster what little gray matter you have left and go hang out with your fellow hypocrites over at the EC.

You won’t accomplish anything, you won’t be respected in the arena of ideas, but you will get your back scratched by like minded minions. And after all, in that world, that’s all that matters anyway.

You can read the full text of Mr. Davis’ column here. If you want to read Graham’s full hypocritical rant you’ll need to Google it, the Corner will not contribute to page hits over there.

Hypocrisy reigns where honesty hides but thankfully for all of us there are far more “Mr. Honest” Lanny Davis’ willing to defend free speech then there are the “Mr. Hypocrite” dwainbwains wanting to destroy it.

Tags: , , , , ,

6 Responses to Free Speech’s Two Faces: Liberal Honesty vs Hypocricy

  1. anson burlingame on March 9, 2012 at 12:59 pm


    You know the EC has specifically called for removing the Limbaugh show from the Armed Forces Network to which you alluded to above. Such is a call by the EC for CENSORSHIP by the federal government over different views and expression of such views, politically. I paste my vey angry retort to such calls on the part of the EC below, simply so your readers can decide for themselves.


    ansonburlingame Says:
    March 9, 2012 at 11:58 am | Reply
    I actually find this hard to believe. Duane is suggesting that the men and women of the Armed Forces NOT have access to information publicly broadcast all over the U.S. simply because he disgrees, even hates, some of the information so broadcast.
    I find that unbelievable and a denegration of the ability of our soldiers, sailors and airmen, to listen, think and decide for themselves how to take a political position, an INDIVIDUAL political position.
    As members of the armed forces they CANNOT “campaign” or publicly support one side or the other. But they sure has heck have the absolute RIGHT to hear what any other American can hear!!! To suggest otherwise is abhorrent to me, absolutely abhorrent.
    If the KKK decides to start broadcasting and gets enough “listenership” and money to do so, then even that kind of broadcast should be heard for those that want to listen. Putting a particular program on AFN does in no way show support for any particular views. But to CENSOR any program, otherwise allowed on the American airways, is absolutely a reprehesible suggestion.
    I listened to the “Thriller in Manila” long ago while underwater and about 6000 miles from home on AFN. We went to periscope depth and “tuned in” while carrying 16 nuclear weapons targeted against …. during the Cold and Vietnam War. It was a LINK TO HOME, America from far away.
    And you want to now CENSOR such links to home for men and women in COMBAT, risking their lives each and every day?
    Duane, I really must restrain myself in this comment or otherwise I will sound like JanesReaction from the opposite direction.
    NO ONE is forced to listen to Limbaugh but many choose to do so. Now why I ask would you even come close to suggesting that men and women overseas should not be provided the same choice as other Americans living normal lives?
    Simply despicable in my view!!!

    • A Nonny Moose on March 9, 2012 at 2:46 pm

      Well Anson, this is why I say you’re much more patient than I am. Apparently a lot nicer, too. You say it’s hard to believe that other blogger would call for such censorship (and yes, calling for government action to take Rush off the air is a call for censorship). I don’t find it the least bit difficult to believe. When you have reached the heights of arrogance he apparently has, it really isn’t a stretch to believe that you are in a position to decide for everyone else what they should and should not listen to. They (the far left, and especially that particular person) really do believe themselves to be so very much smarter than everyone else. Why else would they believe that they should get all your money so they can make your day to day decisions for you?

      So no, I’m not the least bit surprised that blogger seriously thinks he’s in a position to tell the members of the armed forces what they should or should not be allowed to listen to. After all, who knows best for the military than a retired postal worker? It’s laughable, like most of the pap he posts, but in his mind it deserves to be brought down from Sinai just like everything else he cares to inflict upon share with his minions. I’m sure Senator Levin will be moved to action by such brilliant and impassioned reasoning as “I don’t like it, legislate it off the air!” coming from a tiny little peon in Joplin Missouri, of course (snicker).

      I will say one complimentary thing, however. The neck muscles on that guy must be amazing to hold up a head that large.

      • Geoff Caldwell on March 9, 2012 at 8:56 pm

        Rarely is the occasion on which we disagree. But on this one instance I must.
        I’m afraid you have the wrong muscle concerning Dwain. It is not his neck muscles struggling to hold up his “large” head, it is his sphincter straining beyond humanity to keep it in.

  2. anson burlingame on March 9, 2012 at 6:07 pm

    Nonny and Geoff,

    The comments continued from the above post “over there” and I decided to post my own blog of the whole string, just to let readers know what was going on, my readers, not his.

    He showed his true colors by cutting off the debate and telling me to “shove it up…..” Typical union THUG, about which I have written.

    He also refers to my “superior” or arrogantly expressed knowledge on the military and foreign affairs, “over there” As far as I know he delivered mail for a career after High School. I went to college and post graduate school and actually worked in such an environment for over 27 years. His collegue, who has noticably, agreed in principle with my points on the EC’s call for censorship, laughingly, to me referred to what a “commander” would do.

    Check his resume and show me anywhere he ever had “command” of anything. He was a bureaucrat in the Navy and as far as I know NEVER rose to a level of real command, of a tug boat or anything else, where there is NO ONE behind you, telling you what to do. It is YOUR watch buddy, and until you have been there, done that, I reject your assumptions of what others have or should have done.

    Now is that too arrogant, from an old sailor that did experience all the demands of what real command, on your own in the midst of the Artic Ice, with no one to call upon had to decide and defend later on his decisions?

    As for Duane’s concerns about “..injecting” stuff” into the brains of men and women in uniform, well show me any uniform he ever wore other than that of a postal clerk. HE is the one showing the arrogance of ASSUMING that young and older men and women in uniform might think or do. He has not a clue, in my view.

    As well, you should see the “excuses” flying in private emails. OMG.


    • Geoff Caldwell on March 9, 2012 at 10:51 pm

      Dwain is a coward in the first degree. Wheeler close behind. If were not for the internet and the Globe giving them exposure both would be nothing but the pimples on a gnats ass that they truly are.
      The people that matter know the truth. The people that matter write columns telling the Graham’s and Wheeler’s they don’t have a friggin clue and that censorship is NOT what this country is about.
      As I’ve said before, neither of the two are worth the “nice” you have tried over and over to play with them.
      When push comes to shove they resort to their roots: One a paper pushing Navy bureaucrat the other a letter pushing government bureaucrat. Both owe their existence from what they could suck from others, not from their own accomplishments.
      They gauge their “existence” upon telling others what is “right” and what is “wrong”.
      Yet what their small little minds will never be able to comprehend is that their “existence” means nothing in the real world.
      For in the real world, God knows how many sailors suffered under Wheeler’s B.S. and as for Graham we all know the fruits of his labor: a bankrupt postal service paying him an early retirement pension while those with families hope they don’t get laid off because of his greed and selfishness.
      There is a reason graham, wheeler and the rest of the minions don’t comment “over here” or on your blog. They can’t withstand the scrutiny and exposure it would bring. “Over there” they get a delusion of being in “control” and relish in their faux “superiority”. Anywhere else they are exposed for the little lemmings they are and we both know that just won’t do.
      As for the “excuses” in the emails, it doesn’t surprise me a bit. Cowards are full of excuses and Graham and Wheeler are two of the best.

  3. A Nonny Moose on March 9, 2012 at 7:02 pm

    Anson, Anson, Anson… don’t you get it yet? It doesn’t matter that you actually did it, that you lived it for more than two decades, all while he was drinking coffee, losing letters, and getting 47 paid holidays a year. He has spoken, and so must it be! You are a conservative, therefore your opinion, regardless if it is backed by experience, means nothing. It isn’t facts they’re after, it’s feelings, and if he “feels” he’s right (and when does he not?) then he’s right, actual experience to the contrary be damned, end of story.

    If Jesus Christ himself came back tomorrow, that blogger would post about how He was walking on water all wrong and should have checked with the blogger for advice, how the loaves and fishes would have been of much higher quality if Jesus had let the government do the work instead of trying to do it as a private sector individual, how unfair it was that Christ chose only twelve apostles, and all without going through the open bidding process, and how if they’d have let the Executioner’s Local 397 make the crucifix, Christ would have died much more quickly and we wouldn’t have been subjected to all that boring “Forgive them Father, they know not what they do” stuff. Because he, the esteemed other blogger, knows all! So other than sharing with you his unusual fixation on things going up rectums, was there anything really surprising to that exchange?


September 2021
« Jul