In light of the most recent RW terrorist attack/political assassination in AR

[Rocknrule]

Do you think hate radio is protected speech? I was suggesting earler that Fox, Savage, Limbaugh, etc. be held liable for inciting the TN church shootings, but many DUers opposed that idea, saying free speech is free speech. But one of the only exceptions to the 1st Amendment is deliberate incitement to violence. Unlike videogame makers and Marilyn Manson, who only want to entertain others and express themselves artistically, right wing pundits have malicious intent and consciously condition their listeners to believe that liberals are a cancer on America, are disease-ridden subhuman vermin, and should all be exterminated. We now know that what these people say gets tragic results, and next time, the death toll may be much higher than one or two. Do they still deserve 1st Amendment protection or not? Discuss here.

[yardwork]

1. I don't think that advocating murder is protected free speech.

It's not protected speech to advocate for somebody's death, and these right-wing commentators are doing it. They're doing it because they're getting away with it.

I think it is time that U.S. citizens mount complaints against the corporations that own the media that employ hate-talkers. Ask General Electric if they agree with their employees' statements. Ask Disney and Time-Warner-Cable if they agree with what their employees are saying on the nightly news.

Hit them where it hurts. Profits are all that matter to these corporations. Mount a public relations blitz against them.

[Rocknrule]

5. Fixed

[On the Road]

11. When Gordon Liddy Yells "Head Shots! Head Shots!"

in reference to "defending oneself" against federal agents, there does seem to be a point.

[DangerDave921]

14. Great avatar

The Band was so good. You don't hear much about them, but man they were awesome.

[Monk06]

35. Why resort to firearms when you can use the instantly lethal,

Patriot Package !!!

[paparush]

39. I'm sending you my dry cleaning bill!

:-)

as I just spewed coffee all over myself!

[DangerDave921]

15. examples

What hosts have advocated for someone's death? What did they say?

[yardwork]

18. This recent DU thread has numerous examples.

Some examples of public calls for violence against liberals:

1. Rush Limbaugh: "I tell people don't kill all the liberals. Leave enough so we can have two on every campus – living fossils – so we will never forget what these people stood for."

2. Senator Phil Gramm: "We're going to keep building the party until we're hunting Democrats with dogs."

3. Rep. James Hansen on Bill Clinton: Get rid of the guy. Impeach him, censure him, assassinate him."

4. John Derbyshire intimated in the National Review that because Chelsea Clinton had "the taint," she should "be killed."

5. Ann Coulter: "We need to execute people like John Walker in order to physically intimidate liberals, by making them realize that they can be killed, too."

6. Ann Coulter: "My only regret with Timothy McVeigh is he did not go to the New York Times building."

7. Bill O'Reilly: "ll those clowns over at the liberal radio network, we could incarcerate them immediately. Will you have that done, please? Send over the FBI and just put them in chains."

8. Clear Channel radio host Glenn Beck said he was "thinking about killing Michael Moore" and pondered whether "I could kill him myself, or if I would need to hire somebody to do it," before concluding: "No, I think I could. I think he could be looking me in the eye, you know, and I could just be choking the life out -- is this wrong?"


That's just SOME of the spewed filth of the hundreds of incidents where they've advocated violence towards liberals/Democrats, and these are just SOME of the better known repubs doing it - there's hundreds smaller swine of the GOP who've said the same.

Here's some other hate -

1. Mel Gibson on Frank Rich: "I want to kill him. I want his entrails on a stick. I want to kill his dog."

2. Fresno City Council Member Jerry Duncan in 2003 wrote in an email that police should "Cap" members of the Human Relations Commission and wrote, "If I had one dirty bomb and I could eliminate all the liberals in Fresno at once." When his comments became public, Duncan said "The response I have gotten from the public on this has been 100% supportive."

3. World Socialist newsletter about how "Republican Right prepares for violence"
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2000/nov2000/elec-n24.pdf

4. Shooter/Murderer wanted to "kill liberals who are ruining the country", had books of Hannity and other right wing GOPers who told they were doing such - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_Knoxville_Unitarian_U...

5. Right winger backer and often a TV guest, Ted Nugent calling for violence -
http://vyan.blogspot.com/2007/08/nugent-calls-for-viole...
(some info obtained from http://www.preemptivekarma.com/archives/2007/07/dancing... )

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=3790402&mesg_id=3790402

[DangerDave921]

19. thanks

I've not heard of some of those folks. Some ugly language there, definitely. I know Coulter deals in hyperbole for shock value so who gives a F what she says. But I still don't see any direct advocacy of a crime. Generalized talk of getting rid of one's opponent does not rise to the level of a crime.

I think public shaming of the show owners is the way to go.

[warren pease]

22. "...I still don't see any direct advocacy of a crime."

Sounds a little like Pelosi blathering on about how impeachment requires evidence that a crime's been committed.

Apparently her reading comprehension sucks because Kucinich has been kind enough to provide her with 39 separate incidents in which the Bushies committed or conspired to commit impeachable offenses, along with the evidence that backs up each of the 39.

But that's another topic. I want to offer this quote from rabid neocon loon and wingnut radio talk show host Michael Reagan regarding what he feels should happen to political activist and 9/11 truther Mark Dice.

Dice had been sending 9/11 truth DVDs and articles to US troops in Iraq and Afghanistan in hopes that they might gain a better understanding of why they've been sent to these shit-holes, who's getting rich off their spilled blood and who created the extraordinary piece of street theater that kicked off the whole bullshit profit machine known among gullible foods as the war on (some) terrorists.

But Michael Reagan, champion of everyone's right to remain as dumb and uninformed as he is, called Dice a traitor who deserved to be executed for the crime of distributing information contrary to the Official Conspiracy Theory, a mortal sin that questions the legitimacy of the regime and that therefore can't go unpunished.

Here's this fine christian man speaking his mind on his June 10th show:

“Excuse me folks, I’m going to say this. We ought to find the people who are doing this, take them out and shoot them. Really. You take them out, they are traitors to this country, and shoot them. You have a problem with that? Deal with it. You shoot them. You call them traitors, that’s what they are, and you shoot them dead. I’ll pay for the bullets.

“How about you take Mark Dice out and put him in the middle of a firing range. Tie him to a post, don’t blindfold him, let it rip and have some fun with Mark Dice.”

Oh what a joker! What a big kidder. He's putting us on of course. And yet... his estimated 4 million listeners must include at least a half-dozen fundie nut jobs, locked and loaded idiots twitching in anticipation of the official go-ahead to launch the great ideological purge.

So... does that qualify as "direct advocacy of a crime?" Or am I just being overly cautious and should just embrace my armed and dangerous wingnut brothers and invite them in for a cup of coffee?


wp

[theboss]

27. That's not advocacy of a crime

It's idiotic hyperbole. And it probably could cause a mentally ill person to act in a rash manner. It's careless. It's stupid.

It's protected.

You sound like the right-winger ranting about Alec Baldwin.

[warren pease]

29. One loon's idiotic hyperbole is another's call to action...

You really don't see a guy with 4 million listeners calling for the murder of another guy, and then volunteering to pay for the bullets, as the least bit provocative?

I'll bet all the money I no longer have that if Malloy called for the same treatment for Pelosi -- let's even say he ratcheted it down so his exhortation was maybe a tenth as harsh as Reagan's -- his ass would be in prison or getting renditioned to Egypt for inciting this and advocating that and probably a little conspiracy to commit tossed in for laughs.

So I'd suggest it's not the sanctity of human life we're interested in protecting. It's the sanctity of a right wing nut case to call for any violent acts against anybody of a dissident point of view. And it's all about protecting the ruling class from the peasantry, protecting the official 9/11 bullshit story from those who have torn it into small pieces and protecting the right's power and again asserting the left's powerlessness to resist the maniacs who run the show.

wp

[theboss]

30. This has been settled law since 1968.

It's highly provacative. It's protected.

Once again, everyone at DU thinks the world began in 2000.

You know who these decisions protected? Communists, black nationalist, and war protestors.

Learn your history for God's sake.

[DangerDave921]

42. How about

when Ms. Malveaux expressed her opinion that she hoped Clarence Thomas' wife would feed him a lot of butter and eggs so that he would die an early death? Is that hate speech? Should she be banned from TV? Should she be charged with a crime for advocating the death of Thomas?

[Mad_Dem_X]

40. AMEN!

Calling for someone's death is *not* protected speech. We must hold these hatemongers accountable!

[Blue_In_AK]

2. I hate to keep bringing this up, but

but the zip code abbreviation for Arkansas is AR -- AK is Alaska.

But to answer your question, hate radio should NOT be protected speech, especially in light of these recent killings. It's obvious that some weak-minded individuals take the talk about destroying liberals too literally.

[BOSSHOG]

3. We should have a national chat about some form of a fairness doctrine

just to nitpick a tad my Friend. Arkansas is AR, Alaska is AK. Those A states are hard to figure out sometimes.

Isn't it interesting that reagan gave birth to limbaugh and his ilk by doing away with the fairness doctrine and that limbaugh and his ilk fear the fairness doctrine. Why is that?

[BrklynLiberal]

4. I believe there has been much discussion of this...with no clear conclusion yet.

http://www.preemptivekarma.com/archives/2006/12/free_speech_or.html

There would have to be a successful prosecution to set a precedent.

[Andy823]

6. I really don't think

This can be called a "RW terrorist attack/political assassination. We don't even know what the link was between the killer and the victim. Nuts are nuts, not matter what party they belong to, and I still have not heard anywhere what political party this guy belong to, have you?

Sure there are nuts out there that do listen to the crap on TV and the radio, and I do think that there comes a time when a line must be drawn as to the content of "free speech" when they promote violence in any form, but I still think we should not go as far as to say it's a "war" against the RW, and that we all must arm ourselves to protect our life. Bush has divided this country like no other president in my life time, and it is going to take a hell of a lot to get things back to normal, but dividing it even further by claiming this was a "terrorist attack" or a "political assassination" is going to far in my view.

[yardwork]

8. I don't think that it's a good approach to single out the incidents of violence.

I think we need to go to the heart of the matter.

Rush Limbaugh ought to be fired for what he said about Elizabeth Edwards today, and if it takes a public outcry to get that done, we should cry out.

That woman on Faux News who said that Obama should be assassinated? She should have been fired and since she was not, we should be asking Faux News why not.

And so forth.

[DangerDave921]

13. What the heck?

Someone on Fox said he should be assassinated? Who? When? I missed that story.

Rush's comment about Edwards was disgusting.

[yardwork]

17. Liz Trotta. YouTube here.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hErpJvHhk2U

[Dreamer Tatum]

7. Do people who jump to conclusions deserve First Amendment protection?

I'd be curious to know.

[magellan]

9. I'm not convinced Gwatney's murder was politically motivated

But the Adkisson/UU church sure was.

Whatever the case with Johnson, there's a certain amount of responsibility that comes with free speech and it needs to be enforced with these reckless RW shills. Why it isn't is a continuing source of aggravation to me.

I came home from several years in the UK to find RWers publicly calling for violence against liberals, on the TV and radio. It was shocking to me, not only because it seemed to have gone MAINSTREAM (i.e. condoned) but because it's what we usually find in OTHER countries, where dictators rule. And NO ONE in a position of authority was speaking out against it!

I felt like I'd come home to an alien world. And I still do.

[jobycom]

10. First, let's see what really caused the attack in AR. I don't think it was politics

or at least not only politics. The killer asked for the man specifically, spoke to him briefly, and shot only him. He didn't shoot the receptionist or the volunteers, the way you'd expect if it were a hate crime, and he didn't try to kill anyone else (except the cops, maybe, but that had all the earmarks of a suicide-by-cop).

A recent story claims the killer had a couple of sets of car keys from the victim's car lots in his house. Maybe he was afraid a car was going to be repossessed. Maybe a car was repossessed. Maybe even that's why the victim lost his job. We don't know yet.

As for the bigger picture of your post, yes, I think even conservative radio hosts have inviolable rights, and the only exception would be a direct, specific call to violence against a person or a group. Saying "Kill all the liberals" isn't enough, I don't think, since that's a rhetorical device that normal people wouldn't take seriously--much like the oft-repeated Shakespearean line "kill all the lawyers." Saying "Someone grab a gun and go down to your nearest Democratic HQ and start firing, you weaklings" would be.

Just MHO. Worthless, as always.

[DangerDave921]

12. of course they deserve 1st amendment

This is a massively important issue for all Americans -- the right to free speech. First off, I agree that direct incitement to violence is NOT protected. So if any talk show host advocates the murder of someone, that is not protected. But that is a far cry from what some call "hate speech." That is a vague and amorphous term that has no real legal definition other than certain listeners find it objectionable.

I am in the car a lot and I listen to a lot of talk radio. I've never heard Savage or Boortz, but I've listened to Air America, Rush, Hannity, Levin, and lots of local stations. Even Dr. Laura for laughs. And I've never heard any host advocate murder. So when you say that these hosts condition listeners to believe that liberals should be exterminated, I have to disagree. If you can show me some link to such language, I'd be glad to take a look. And I think you give these hosts way too much power to assume they can cause listeners to commit murder. Will some demented guy take action? Sure, but you can't then ban a certain radio show (or a whole line-up of shows) because you think it had some influence on the guy. And while you cite Manson as entertainment (seriously??), what radio hosts do is entertainment too.

I listened to a little Stephanie today on AA. She was making fun of McCain a lot. Is that hate speech? I'm sure RW'ers thought it over the top.

[SeattleGirl]

31. Look, inciting violence is NOT protected speech.

How do you think Manson got convicted? It was because Bugliosi was able to show that while he did not commit the Tate/LaBiance murders himself, because of his role as the head of his "family", he was as culpable as they were.

Ever see the movie "The Accused" with Jodie Foster? The principle is the same. She was gang raped in a bar, and the guys that were shouting encouragement to the rapists were convicted of inciting the act. (The movie was based on an actual event.)

I am a huge advocate for free speech, but when someone like Rush or Billo or Coulter or any of those cockroaches start saying over and over again, in many ways, that liberals should be bombed, shot, knifed, killed, etc., THAT is not protected free speech, and those people should be held legally responsible if it can be shown that there is a connection between them and a person who committed a harmful or deadly act against another. It's not the easiest thing in the world to prove, but it can be done.

[theboss]

32. Christ, this is an idiotic post

Manson did not get life in prison for inciting violence. He got life in prison for conspiracy to murder.
In order for their to be conspiracy to murder, there has to be a meeting of the minds. In order for there to be a meeting of the minds, the two minds have to - you know - meet. You can't form a conspiracy with a human being you never met before.

Learn what you are talking about before you start spouting nonsense.

I believe the men in the accused for convicted for being accessories to rape. Again, it had nothing to do with speech. It had everything to do with being present at a fucking rape and encouraging it. Unless you can prove that Rush Limbaugh was in the building cheering the shooter, I don't think you have much of a case, counselor.

Again, learn what you are goddamn talking about.

Finally, saying that liberals should be bombed, shot, knifed or killed is protected speech. I'll prove it.

"All Dallas Cowboys fans should have their houses firebombed."

Hey...look at that...I am not in jail.

What you are advocating is impossible to prove unless you want to turn over - oh - about 100 years worth of established case law on the First Amendment.

I recommend learning what you are talking about.

[SeattleGirl]

34. And I recommend you stop doing knee jerk reactions to things.

And if you had actually READ what I posted, you would note that I said there had to be a direct correlation between the words of a person and another person's actions. But hey, I guess you just like to spout off and imply people are stupid or ignorant, rather than actually reading and understanding what they wrote.

That's all I'm going to say, because YOUR prattle really pisses me off.

[theboss]

37. I actually READ it.

You implied that Manson was just kind of a cheerleader. You don't know the difference between inciting and conspiring. It was a dumb post.

[DangerDave921]

36. You are just plain wrong -- sorry

Your Charles Manson analogy is simply wrong -- both factually and legally. Manson was not convicted for spouting off about killing people or inciting violence or encouraging others to kill. He was convicted as being the ringleader of an organization that killed people. Manson actually planned the murders, recruited the killers, and led the whole thing. He was directly involved in the whole sordid event, even though he was not physically present in the house. How is that analagous to a talk show host?

Also, the gang rape situation is also completely different. Again, directly inciting or encouraging a crime is a crime. But again -- how is that analagous to a talk show host?

[slackmaster]

16. I think it's premature to call the LR murder a terrorist or political event

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x3797759

But to answer your question, yes it is protected speech up to the point where someone on the air advocates a very specific criminal act.

[TooBigaTent]

20. All it will take is one liberal face on tv (if you can find one) to suggest that McInsane and pukes

need to be eliminated and one person to be killed in the following year by someone registered as a Democrat for the right wingnuts to start talking about how speech needs to be monitored and controlled.

Issues are only important if they benefit or directly affect the GOPers.

[xchrom]

21. i have to agree with you.

'free' speech isn't entirely 'free' and for good reason -- and iciting to violence is a perfect example of where there should be prosecutions.

t. mcveigh didn't 'act' alone -- he acted in accordence with all the right wing hate speech -- and not one -- not one of those fucks will be punished.

the same w/ eric rudolph and abortion doctor providers.

[theboss]

26. And who decides what speech is acceptable? Because I want that job

First thing to go...Cosmo.

[DangerDave921]

43. McVeigh questions

He acted in accordance with right wing hate speech? How? By blowing up a federal building? Can you explain this one?

And who exactly should be punished? And for what crime?

[theboss]

23. Ban rap music!

It makes black people kill each other.

[DangerDave921]

41. LOL

I see no one has a response to your logic!

[theboss]

24. Ban Playboy!

It incites men to, I dunno, like fucking!

[theboss]

25. In all seriousness, of course they deserve protection

This is such an idiotic conversation.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

28. Been there. Done that. Check out the Haymarket trials.

Guy in Michigan was sentenced to death for writing a pamphlet found in possession of one of the people in the crowd at the Chicago Haymarket Riot (aka Haymarket Bombing, aka police massacre of a bunch of unarmed people because the cops were startled by a loud noise.)

It remains the most absurd death sentence ever handed down in American history. (I believe he committed suicide in his cell.)

This guy's lefty pamphlet may have influenced some other guy in the next State to do something or another... let's hang him.

(Not that this has any bearing on the broader issue, but I think the cops were mostly killed by other cops in the frenzy when they all opened fire on the crowd.)

[DU GrovelBot]

33. ## PLEASE DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##

==================
GROVELBOT.EXE v4.1
==================



This week is our third quarter 2008 fund drive. Democratic Underground is
a completely independent website. We depend on donations from our members
to cover our costs. Please take a moment to donate! Thank you!

[wvbygod]

38. Need a link to document the fact it was a RW terrorist attack/political assassination in AR

I must have missed where this was confirmed. TIA.

[Rocknrule]

44. Let's try something:

"I tell people don't kill all the Jews. Leave enough so we can have two on every campus -- living fossils -- so we will never forget what these people stood for." (Rush Limbaugh)

Or

"My only regret with Timothy McVeigh is he did not go to a synagogue." (Ann Coulter)

Or

"I'll tell you who should be tortured and killed at Guantanamo -- every filthy Jew in the U.S. Congress." (Sean Hannity)

Or

"To fight only the al-Qaeda scum is to miss the terrorist network operating within our own borders ... Who are these traitors? Every rotten Jew in this country, that's who." (Michael Savage)

In this context, would you say this is protected speech, if its target audience is unstable, sociopathic RWers who think having a different opinion should be a capital crime? What these people are doing is essentially whispering in their listeners' ears: "Execute Order 66."