A Few Thoughts on the Irresponsible Use of Freedom of Speech
I am not a political person. I always try to stay out of political discussions, and I’m not going to argue with anyone about his or her political opinions.
In
addition, I am not particularly a fan of Pres. Trump. You can ask my wife—I
have waxed eloquent in frustration about him numerous times. His
presidency was chaotic, and his public statements are often cruel, cockeyed, irresponsible,
and inflammatory.
There is
no question that his rhetoric has been a factor in the degeneration of civil political
discourse in America.
Nonetheless,
I am not surprised at all that there was an assassination attempt on him
yesterday. Why?
If you were
of a certain unbalanced mindset and you believed all the foolhardy,
overblown statements regarding Trump made by politicians and pundits and
celebrities over the past few months, you too might decide that assassination
was justified.
What statements
am I referring to? Let’s look at just a few recent examples from three online
sources.
To
Democrats, it’s not just their nominee but democracy on the ballot
Democrats
have centered the 2024 race around how they believe former Donald Trump’s
return to the White House could spell the end of
American democracy, saying that he’ll be an
autocrat who dramatically expands executive power and serve his own interests
over the country’s.
Sen.
Patty Murray, D-Wash., . . . said, “With so much at stake, the American people
need to understand what a serious threat a second
Trump presidency would be to our democracy, our fundamental freedoms, and their
livelihoods.”
James
Carville Warns Trump Win Would Mean “The End of the Constitution”
Longtime
Democratic strategist James Carville . . . argued Friday that a second Trump
term would mean “the end of the Constitution.”
. . .
“Lawlessness on a scale that we can’t comprehend,”
the 79-year-old strategist said. . . . “They’re already coming out saying
they’re going to do it. Christian nationalism is
going to take hold in the courts. If Trump wins, he will turn over everything
to them.”
“Because
if we lose, we lose the Constitution,” he
said Friday. “If you think these guys give a rat’s a--
about freedom of speech — freedom of anything — you’re just not living in the
world.”
.
. . “For that matter, what convinces you that these
massive camps he’s planning are only for migrants? So, yes, I’m worried about
me — but only as much as I’m worried
about all of us,” MSNBC host Rachel Maddow said during an interview with CNN’s
Oliver Darcy in June. . . .
Rep.
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., told podcast host Kara Swisher that she was
concerned about Trump jailing her if he wins in November.
“I
mean, it sounds nuts, but I wouldn’t be surprised if
this guy threw me in jail,” she said. “He’s
out of his mind. I mean, he did his
whole first campaign around ‘lock her up.’[1] This is his motto.”
MSNBC
host Nicolle Wallace suggested she also might not be here next year should
Trump be elected, arguing he may get rid of freedom
of the press.
“Depending
on what happens in November, seven months from now, we
can’t say for certain that there would even be a White House Correspondents’
Dinner or even a free press or even a White House press corps.
Right? You don’t have to have one. Could be another norm Trump blows up,”
Wallace said in April while discussing President Biden’s remarks at the White
House Correspondents’ dinner.
“While
our democracy won’t exactly fall apart immediately without it, the real threat
looms larger. A candidate with outward disdain not
just for a free press, but for all of our freedoms and for the rule of law
itself,” she continued.
So,
according to those above, if Trump (who is “out of his mind”) is reelected he
will
- Dramatically
expand executive power.
- End
American democracy.
- Turn
the country into a dictatorship.
- End
the Constitution.
- Usher
in unimaginable lawlessness.
- Take
away our freedom of speech.
- Throw
political opponents into jail or massive “camps.”
- End
freedom of the press.
- End
“all our freedoms.”
- End
“the rule of law itself.”
Some of us
remember when political discourse was based on party platforms and on a
candidate’s actual beliefs and agenda. But these types of statements are
overblown hype that is intended to obfuscate the true issues and frighten voters.
These speakers know their statements aren’t true. No president could sweep
into office and make the kind of radical changes they are referencing. Americans
wouldn’t stand for it. Our governmental institutions wouldn’t allow it. Even
the recent Supreme Court ruling doesn’t give the president that kind of power.[2]
So I’ll say it again: If you were of a certain unbalanced mindset and you believed all the foolhardy, overblown statements regarding Trump made by politicians and pundits and celebrities over the past few months, you too might decide that assassination was justified.
Americans must hold all public figures—all of them, on the right and on the left—accountable for their words, especially those words that are demonstrably untrue. Do I believe that those who make inflammatory comments such as those quoted above bear some of the guilt for the death of Corey Comperatore?
Absolutely.
Copyright
2024 Steven Nyle Skaggs
NOTE: If you
care to hear more violent fear-mongering, click here and
listen for approximately two minutes. Unconscionable and chilling.
[1] Those whose knowledge of our
country’s history goes further back than the last four years will recall that
Pres. Trump did not, in fact, “lock her up” during his presidency.
[2] “Trump asserts a far broader
immunity than the limited one we have recognized,” Roberts wrote in the
majority opinion, adding, “The text of the [Impeachment Judgment] Clause
provides little support for such an absolute immunity.” PBS
News, July 1, 2024.
I appreciate these thoughts. It's scary how people ingest news from any source (even social media) without undergoing any fact checking.
ReplyDeleteThanks, Kristie, and thanks to a number of you who have sent me emails. The conversations have been open and thought-provoking. Do we all agree on everything? Nope. Are we mad at each other? Not as far as I know! Seems like it's sort of like the way political discussions ought to be. You're great people--thanks again!
ReplyDeleteWow. Thats really something. I didn't know most of that. Violence is just wrong. Totally wrong. No matter who is the victim. That was really good. Thank you
ReplyDeleteI have no idea why the blog thinks your name is "Cundy." Sorry about that, Cindy!
Delete