Let's censor the politicians who want to censor free speech?

Washington Examiner Editorial:
Here's an idea — let's ban Sen. Chris Murphy's tweets

...
It was jaw-dropping to read Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., tweeting on Tuesday that “Infowars is the tip of a giant iceberg of hate and lies that uses sites like Facebook and YouTube to tear our nation apart.” He doesn’t want Facebook to think it can stop there. “These companies must do more than take down one website. The survival of our democracy depends on it.”

The survival of American democracy depends on the censoring of opinions that Murphy decides are lies or else hateful, perhaps both.

It can be assumed that Sen. Murphy wouldn’t wish to ban all conservative outlets, just those who push “hate” and who “lie.” But much of the Left believes Christian teaching on marriage and sexuality counts as “hate,” so the senator's proposed criteria hardly inspire confidence.

It is, of course, true that InfoWars spreads lies — its own legal counsel argues that no one is expected to believe it — and it does harm. But what other sites would Murphy want to target. What’s the shape and size of the “iceberg” Murphy refers to? What does Murphy consider a lie?

Let’s look at how he uses that word.

“Of all the Trump lies last night,” Murphy wrote the morning after a GOP presidential debate, “[his] claim that assault weapons ban didn't work is maybe the biggest. Data is clear - it saved lives.”

To the contrary, many respected experts writing, for example, in the New York Times, accept as true what Murphy considers a “lie,” and that “even gun control advocates acknowledge a larger truth: The law that barred the sale of assault weapons from 1994 to 2004 made little difference.”

Is the Times part of the iceberg of which InfoWars is the tip? Should Facebook ban their “lies”?

In 2017, Murphy groused, “Trump rehashed the ‘U.S. pullout from Iraq created ISIS’ lie tonight.” Again, the senator's rhetorical reflex is to brand a debatable proposition with which he disagrees as a lie? An NPR fact check said assessing the claim was “not simple,” and granted “So, yes, the withdrawal of U.S. troops helped ISIS.” NPR is next!

Branding opinions as lies has become a standard political modus operandi. "Bush lied — people died," was so much more effective than shouting "Bush made a terrible mistake."
...
Connecticut would be wise to vote this man out of office.  He is just not intelligent enough for the job.  The branding of opinions as lies is the reaction of a weak mind to an opinion he disagrees with.  It is a step down the road to repealing the 1st Amendment.  We already know that Murphy would like to do away with the 2nd Amendment too.  Would he also like to do away with due process for the accused?

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Democrats worried about 2018 elections

Obama's hidden corruption that enriched his friends

The Christmas of the survivors of Trump's first year in office?