>>A FRESNO STATE UNIVERSITY PROFESSOR WHO HAD SOME STRONG
WORDS FOR BARBARA BUSH AFTER SHE PASSED AWAY WAS BEING THREATENED
BY POSSIBLY GETTING FIRED BUT IT TURNS OUT UNIVERSITY OFFICIALS
WILL NOT FIRE HER BECAUSE IT TURNS OUT SHE HAS SOMETHING
KNOWN AS FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS.
IT'S ALMOST AS IF THE CONSTITUTION HAS MORE THAN
JUST THE SECOND AMENDMENT.
SHE IS A TENURED PROFESSOR BUT THAT IS NOT THE REASON WHY
SHE IS ABLE TO KEEP HER JOB.
FRESNO STATE AS PART OF THE CAL STATE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM IN
CALIFORNIA, IT IS PUBLICLY FUNDED MEANING THAT
CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS ARE INTACT AND IF UNIVERSITY OFFICIALS FIRE
HER THEY ARE LITERALLY VIOLATING HER FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS.
IT
SEEMED AS THOUGH THE UNIVERSITY OFFICIALS REALLY WANT
TO MAKE CLEAR THAT THEY DID NOT LIKE THE WAY SHE HANDLED
THE SITUATION.
EVEN GIVEN THE FACT THAT THEY DID NOT LIKE THE TWEETS
THEY STILL HAVE NO RIGHT TO FIRE HER.
>>COUPLE OF POINTS HERE.
IT BOTHERS ME THAT THEY KEEP CALLING IT DISGRACEFUL.
IN AMERICA IF YOU ARE IN FAVOR OF A WAR THAT KILLS
MILLIONS, NOT A BIG DEAL.
MILLIONS OF CIVILIANS BY THE WAY.
MIKE POMPEO PROBABLY GOING TO BECOME SECRETARY OF STATE
SOON, ETC.
BUT IF YOU ARE SLIGHTLY DISRESPECTFUL TO ANYONE IN
POWER, YOU CAN'T DO THAT.
NOBODY GETS FIRED FOR ACTUALLY KILLING THE CIVILIANS, BUT YOU
GET FIRED FOR SAYING THAT WASN'T SUCH A GREAT IDEA.
THAT IS WHAT SHE HAD ATTACKED BARBARA BUSH ABOUT.
BY THE WAY WHEN ASKED ABOUT CIVILIAN DEATHS IN IRAQ BARBARA
BUSH SAID HER BEAUTIFUL MIND COULDN'T BE BOTHERED WITH IT.
I WOULD ARGUE THAT THAT IS FAR MORE DISGRACEFUL A COMMENT
THAN ANYTHING A PROFESSOR SAID.
>> BARBARA BUSH WAS IN A POSITION OF POWER.
YOU ARE ABLE TO REFER TO HURRICANE KATRINA VICTIMS WHO
HAD TO BE DISPLACED IN THE HOUSTON ASTRODOME, YOU GET
TO REFER TO THEM AS UNDERPRIVILEGED AND THEY
ARE BETTER OFF IN THE ASTRODOME ANYWAY.
YOU CAN MAKE THOSE DISGRACEFUL STATEMENTS WITHOUT HAVING TO
WORRY ABOUT LOSING YOUR JOB.
I THINK FREE SPEECH ON PUBLICLY FUNDED COLLEGE CAMPUSES AS
INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT REGARDLESS OF WHAT THE SPEECH IS.
AS LONG AS YOU ARE NOT DOING SOMETHING UNCONSTITUTIONAL
ñ I BELIEVE IN PROTECTING THAT SPEECH.
IT IS A FREE MARKETPLACE OF IDEAS AND YOU CAN'T HAVE PUBLIC
EMPLOYEES FIRING PEOPLE FOR SPEECH OR BANNING THAT TYPE
OF SPEECH.
>> THE WASHINGTON POST POINTED OUT THAT TENURE SHOULD NOT
ABSOLVE ANYONE FROM THEIR CONSEQUENCES OF THEIR
VITRIOLIC WORDS.
NO, THAT IS THE WHOLE POINT OF TENURE.
IT IS TO ALLOW FOR WORDS THAT OFFEND WHETHER THEY ARE
RIGHT-WING OR NOT BECAUSE YOU ARE IN THE FREE MARKETPLACE
OF IDEAS.
THAT LEADS US TO POINT NUMBER THREE, THE HYPOCRISY OF THE
IDEA.
WHERE ARE THEY?
ON THE BENCH APPEARS IN THE MY LOVE?
WHENEVER
THEY ARE GETTING PAID A LOT OF MONEY TO SPEAK ON THIS CAMPUSES,
ALL OF A SUDDEN THEY ARE LIKE FREE SPEECH.
WE DEFEND THOSE GUYS.
WE THINK THEY ARE CLOWNS, WE THINK THEIR SPEECH IS
DISGRACEFUL BUT THEY HAVE A RIGHT TO SAY AND THEY HAVE A
RIGHT TO GET PAID A LOT OF MONEY AND I AM IN FAVOR OF THAT.
BUT I NOTICED THAT THE RIGHT WING ONLINE IS NOT ANIMATED
ABOUT THIS PROFESSORS FREEDOM OF SPEECH.
ALL OF A SUDDEN THEY COULDN'T CARE LESS, IN FACT THEY ARE THE
ONES WHO WANT HER FIRED FOR SPEAKING OUT.
>>HERE IS THE ISSUE, I DON'T FEEL BAD ABOUT THE FACT THAT WE
ARE FAIR WHEN IT COMES TO THINGS LIKE THIS.
WE ARE ABLE TO LOOK AT BOTH SIDES, UNDERSTAND WHAT THE
RIGHT THING TO DO IS AND STILL WANT TO PROTECT THE SPEECH
OF THOSE WE DISAGREE WITH.
I THINK THAT MAKES YOU A GOOD PERSON WHO GENUINELY
BELIEVES IN THE CONSTITUTION.
BUT AT THE SAME TIME I GET BACK AND FORTH FROM FEELING PROUD OF
NOT HAVING THIS RIDICULOUS PRO-LIBERAL ANTI-CONSERVATIVE
STANCE TO FEELING LIKE I SUCK.
THE REALITY IS WHEN CONSERVATIVES DO WHAT THEY DO AT
BERKELEY, IT IS NOT REALLY ABOUT PROTECTING FREE SPEECH, THEY
HAVE PROTECTED A BUSINESS OUT OF CREATING A CIRCUS AROUND THEM.
THEY WANT ATTENTION, AND THE BEST WAY IS TO PUT YOURSELF
IN YOUR VICTIM'S SHOES.
IT'S ALL ABOUT GETTING INTO THE NEWS AND BEING PART OF A
CONVERSATION AND IT IS PATHETIC.
>>AT LEAST HAVE THE INTELLECTUAL CONSISTENCY SO YOU CAN
PRETEND LATER THAT YOU ARE HONEST IN PRINCIPLE.
BUT THEY ARE NOT GOING TO DO THAT?
>>OF COURSE NOT.
>>NOW YOU LOOK AT ALL THE RIGHT-WINGERS ONLINE
ATTACKING HER.
ONE OF THE GUYS SAID THIS IS NOT A MATTER OF FREE SPEECH, IT
IS A MATTER OF HUMAN DECENCY.
BUT RIGHT-WINGERS ARE IN FAVOR OF ANN COULTER COMING ON TO
COLLEGE CAMPUSES TALKING ABOUT HOW SHE IS UPSET ABOUT THE
BROWNING OF AMERICA.
>>SHE CALLS IMMIGRANTS PEASANTS.
SHE SAYS IMMIGRANTS FROM MEXICO ARE PEASANTS AND WE DON'T
WANT THEM HERE.
>>ANOTHER PERSON DECLARED WITH THE PROFESSOR SAID HERE ñ I KNOW
YOU CAN'T WAIT TO CHARGE OTHERS WITH RACISM SO I NEED TO EXPLAIN
TO YOU WHAT HATE SPEECH IS.
HATE SPEECH ISN'T I HATE THIS PERSON AND I HAVE SPOKEN ABOUT
THEM.
IT IS ABOUT A PARTICULAR GROUP.
THERE IS NO GROUP OF BARBARA BUSH IS THAT SHE OFFENDED AND
TARGETED.
SHE DID NOT LIKE BARBARA BUSH FOR THE THINGS BARBARA BUSH DID.
IF YOU HATE ME WHICH FOR A LOT OF YOU RIGHT-WING TROLLS, CHECK.
IF YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT THAT, THAT IS NOT HATE SPEECH.
IT MAY NOT BE HATEFUL BUT IT IS NOT HATE SPEECH.
>>WE WOULD SUPPORT YOU IF YOU WANTED TO GO ON A COLLEGE
CAMPUS AND TALK ABOUT THAT.
>>THAT IS RIGHT.
>>HATE SPEECH IS IF YOU SAY I DON'T LIKE CENK NOT BECAUSE HE
IS A LEFT-WING WHATEVER, BUT I DON'T LIKE HIM BECAUSE HE IS A
NERDY TURKS AND I HATE ALL DIRTY TURKS.
I GUESS I AM JUST SO THICK-SKINNED I DON'T CARE
ABOUT ANYTHING.
BUT THAT WOULD BE HATE SPEECH BECAUSE YOU ARE ATTACKING A
WHOLE GROUP.
FINALLY MY FAVORITE ONE WAS A GUY WHO TWEETED, "JUST HEARD
THAT THE FAT DESPICABLE PAY WON'T FACE DISCIPLINE.
FRESNO STATE, CAMPUS OF WORTHLESS SCUM."
THIS GUY WANTS
HER FIRED FOR SAYING OFFENSIVE THINGS.
AND TOTALLY MISSED THE IRONY OF HIS TWEET.
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét