The Bullshit Report

Freedom of Speech is always a tricky subject with religious kooks. They love free speech when one of their nutcase children marches around his school handing out Pentecostal leaflets that tell everyone that gay kids will burn in hell, but they hate free speech when a hip-hop artist sings about some pretty titties. They love free speech when they get to shame young women who are walking into Planned Parenthood clinics, but hate free speech when progressives hold signs that say anti-Christian things like "No War." Despite their self-contradictory love-hate relationships with the First Amendment, perhaps the most amazing aspect of conservative "thought" on this topic is ... they don't understand the concept in the first place.

Witness the witless diatribes of James L. Lambert, a "frequent contributor" to OneNewsNow.com's "Perspectives" columns. He likes to write about "free speech," and that's his right to do so. Hell, based on his extensive expertise on the topic, he should be published far and wide:

James L. Lambert [...] is a licensed nationwide real-estate mortgage loan sales agent. He is licensed with the state of Calif. Department of Real Estate and has a broad background in the real estate lending field. He has worked in various capacities for Crocker National Bank, San Diego Trust and Savings Bank and First Interstate Bank. He has also taught Finance at Mira Costa Community College for 3 years.

Whoa! Stop the presses ... for all of those "lawyers" out there who think that THEY have a monopoly on free-speech interpretation. James Lambert is here to show you what free speechification is all about - it's not just a column, it's a Jumbo with a 5-year-ARM. Anyway, rather than comment on the extraordinary level of retardation that James brings to the "debate" table, I figured I would simply categorize all of his bullshit statements and let them stand on their own two, stupid, chromosomally-deprived feet (his full column is here). Here goes:

UNSUBSTANTIATED STATEMENTS/BASE UNTRUTHS
"Just 60 days ago, liberals representing San Francisco's Board of Supervisors (an elected government body) were just one vote away from censoring radio talk-show host Michael Savage's on-air remarks about pro-illegal alien demonstrators. They charged accused Savage of race and hate speech crimes."

"Leftists agree that their speech should be protected in the public forum. But the speech of conservatives is a different matter."

"The school would not tolerate Minuteman Jim Gilcrest's freedom of speech."

"And on numerous occasions Ahmadinejad has called for the destruction of the United States."

"The radio talk-show host can't order the annihilation of a people, as Ahmadinejad has called for with the Jewish people."

"Admadinejad's regime presents a clear and present danger to the peace of the world. One small suitcase nuclear bomb, if strategically placed, can disrupt the security of the world for generations."

UNWARRANTED COMPARISONS/CONFLATIONS/FALSE CHOICES
"Bollinger and his liberal friends wouldn't "tolerate" the ROTC on their campus -- but they welcome Ahmadinejad with open arms."

"I ask you: With Iran's link to terrorism and this man in power, how safe is the world community? Yet leftists are more anxious to censor the speech of radio talk-show hosts such as Michael Savage."

"Savage is not the leader of a nation. He is a U.S. citizen and is protected by the First Amendment. In contrast, Admadinejad has denied freedom of speech to his opponents; culture police rule urban Iran; and freedom of speech as we know it in America is denied to Iranians."

GENERAL UNMITIGATED STUPIDITY/FALSE CHARACTERIZATIONS
"Is it just me -- or does anyone else see a double standard in how liberals are applying the principle of freedom of speech these days?"

"It was amazing to see all the clamoring among liberals in the last few days regarding Columbia University's offer to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to speak at their university forum."

"I guess liberals have a short memory."

"But these folks on the left seem like they are particularly unclear and uncertain when it comes to free speech."

"I guess liberals don't understand that Michael Savage doesn't have the kind of power that is at the disposal of the president of Iran."

Wow! That's a whole pile of steaming stupid. Frankly, I could spend half the weekend documenting why each of them is ludicrously inaccurate or silly, but what's the point? Trust me, it all comes back to "James just made some shit up." But none of his statements begins to approach the grand prize winning granddaddy of them all, and it deserves some recognition and a response:

"Perhaps they need to read the First Amendment again: 'Congress shall make no law ... prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech ... and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.'"

Thanks, James. Considering you cited no examples of laws enacted to abridge freedom of speech, and no examples of law enforcement officals attempting to enforce a law abridging someone's freedom of speech, I'm presuming that you included this citation to truly drive home the point that you're incapable of making the most basic of intellectual discriminations and connections. I'm also guessing that you have trouble following the recipe for Campbell's "Soup at Hand," and you are often distracted by the instructions to "Lather, Rinse, Repeat" on the back of a shampoo bottle (leading to extra-long showers, and uncomfortable moments of confusion when the shampoo inevitably runs out).

But you're certainly free to talk about those things all you like. It's America.