Stone is the Edward H. Wu identifies a number of potentially serious threats to our capacity to maintain the robust public discourse that is essential to a well-functioning democracy. Before offering a few thoughts on those challenges, though, let me first take issue with the central question raised in the essay:
Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Saul Friedman bio writes the bi-weekly Reflections column for Time Goes By in which he comments on news, politics and social issues from his perspective as one of the younger members of the greatest generation.
He also publishes a weekly column, Gray Matterson aging for Newsday. Having been in the news business for most of my life, I am a First Amendment absolutist.
I believe that the framers of the First Amendment intended it to be the first addition to the new Constitution because they thought it was that important.
Read in its entirety, it is the heart and soul of the unique American right of revolution. It separates thought from theocracy and guarantees the right to express those thoughts, and rally others to peaceful action. I can hear you saying, why are you picking on right-wingers? Well, the left-wingers, like Keith Olberman and Rachel Maddow are critical of conservatives, Republicans and the right-wing talkers but they are not vicious or haters and they do not make their living by deliberately inciting people to play out their anger, often in a dangerous ways.
Nor am I criticizing conservative pundits and anchors working for outfits like Fox News, any more than I am supporting more liberal commentators for MSNBC; neither are fair and balanced, although the Fox News people pretend to be. They are part of the news business and throughout American history, the nation has enjoyed a vigorous, and sometimes infuriating give and take between right and left.
Roosevelt, were ridiculed by the contemporary press even during wartime. I wish reporters were better at their jobs; they are too often uninformed and without purpose.
As a veteran and experienced reporter who learned my craft through formal education and practiced it from the ground the police beat up the White HouseI was trained and subjected to editing that insisted on fairness and accuracy.
So I could criticize the talkers as not real journalists. But the First Amendment protects the rights of any citizen, not just those of us with press credentials.
The speeches of entertainers passing as journalists is "protected speech," whether we like it or not.
Indeed, with the internet and the proliferation of blogging, who is to say what or who is a journalist? But "free" speech does not mean the same as "license.
And there may be consequences, even when taking advantage of the First Amendment. For example, while the amendment also guarantees "the right of the people peaceably to assemble and to petition the government for a redress of grievances," Dr.
Martin Luther King was jailed for violating local laws limiting that right; he was, indeed, disturbing the peace.
King understood that was the price one paid for an act of civil disobedience. So there may be a price for taking the First Amendment as a license to say anything about anyone.
But incendiary language with implied calls for illegal action, some of it based on lies or half-truths, is not always protected speech, as we shall see.
Glenn Beck predicted without reason that President Obama is building "concentration camps," and that "we might be heading toward a totalitarian state. Poplawski, a white supremacist, had come to believe Obama was planning to crack down on gun ownership.
I think it ominously important that these recent killings, including the one at the United States Holocaust Museum that was perpetrated by an admittedly disturbed individual, James von Brunn, who was an obsessed, white racist who hated Obama and Jews. And racism, which still infects this nation, has played a major role in the unusually vituperative and personal attacks on Obama that the talkers have encouraged.
In South Carolina, a prominent Republican figure suggested Michelle Obama is the daughter of a gorilla. But it is intended to provoke more racism and hatred toward government and the law. So at the very least, one would think that these strict constructionist conservatives, like George Will, David Brooks and Charles Krauthammer, would condemn such racism, such incendiary and dangerous lies.
Do they believe that Obama is at once a socialist, communist and fascist? Or that he was not born in the United States? When Fox News commentator Shepard Smith, alone among conservatives, ventured some doubts about the "amped up" people who are "getting their guns out," he was inundated with vicious insults, many racially charged.
Rather, there were howls of protest from the paranoid right when a Department of Homeland Security report accurately predicted an increase in far right extremism. Did you hear any conservative object when Limbaugh joked that men in uniform, given only two bullets, would use them on Nancy Pelosi?
If the worst happens, where will the blame lie?Reflections on Freedom of Speech and the First Amendment grounds its vision of America's most basic freedoms in the intellectual traditions of Western political philosophy, providing crucial insight into the legal challenges of the future through the lens of the ashio-midori.com: George Anastaplo.
Reflections on the First Amendment Shellene Lewis History/ July 03, Brona Pinnolis Reflections on the First Amendment In Baton Rouge, Louisiana twenty three black college students were arrested in an attempt to integrate a local eatery. Reflections on the First Amendment On December 15th, , the first X amendments to the Constitution went into affect.
The first X amendments to the constitution were known as the Bill of Rights. The First Amendment was written by James Madison because the American people were demanding a guarantee of their freedom. Reflections on the First Amendment The First Amendment to the United States Constitution states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people to petition the government for a redress of grievances” .
View Homework Help - HIS Reflections on the First Amendment ashio-midori.com from ABS at University of Phoenix. HIS Reflections on the First Amendment Paper United States Constitution. Reflections on the First Amendment HIS/ June 15, Dick Eacott Reflections on the First Amendment The First Amendment to the United States Constitution states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people to petition the government for a.