Blah blah blah blah

Really?
 

Apparently you have a limited sense of humor. "Trump Derangement Syndrome" is a status assigned to people who oppose Trump no matter what he says or does. It is widely used, and anyone who follows politics is familiar with it.

The new category of "Carl Derangement Syndrome" is a variation on that which is used for someone who opposes me no matter what I say. It is a joke. You qualify since you refuse to accept my plain, uncomplicated English language words. You "project" a belief that I am using "racist buzz words."

Do me a favor. Identify some of those buzz words and show where I have used them in my posts. Show actual quotes found in my messages.

You spent "a great deal of time" in the White House? What would it add up to in the aggregate in hours, or days? I was assigned there for several years. I protected several different Presidents over the years, including my favorite --- Ronald Reagan.

Carl in Tampa

.

I visited there many times as I reported first to Adm Arliegh Burke and then Gen Twining when they acted as the head of JCS.

Your constant need to be sarcastic and "needle" is a bit tiresome. Of corse I did not spend years there as you did, but worked there for weeks at a time depending on what was happening. Many nights at the Naval Observatory which is where the CNO lived at that time.

Got back during my activist time in the Republican Party with certain PA VIPs. No, you certainly were there longer, and you made that clear.

I was also a fan of Reagan.....he would be disgusted at the current Oval Office. My impression, he as one of my favorites, Eisenhower was honest and cringed at deceit. That is it for my sharing. You allies and fans called me a few obscene names when this was mentioned, as you said for context.

My time working "around" the Oval was not because I was a great person. Simple happenstance. I worked in the Pentagon in the crypto area,....if you know the Pentagon, that would be 4D. Arm Burke needed some help when I first arrived..I was assigned, and he liked me. That's it.

Cannot compete with your staring down story but early on was in Nam for a short time and one terrible memory was holding the head of a great friend as he died in the mud.

Blah

Back on Point
 

Returning to the theme of my original post, Free Speech is under assault on many fronts.

I first made the point that "counter-demonstrations" against people who are regarded as engaging in unacceptable "hate speech" are assaulting First Amendment provisions for Free Speech when the counter-demonstrators engage in violence or intimidation with the specific intent of silencing the speech they oppose.

Then in a later post I gave several examples of the assault on Free Speech on college campuses, where violence, rioting, and burning were the weapons of those opposing Conservative Speakers scheduled to give talks on campus.

Now, let's talk about people who are asserting that the First Amendment does not protect "hate speech." Most notable among this group is former Chairman of the Democratic National Committee, and former Governor of Vermont Howard Dean, who has made this claim. Other public officials, like the Mayor of Portland, Oregon, have made the same claim.

However, the Supreme Court has repeatedly invalidated laws which were intended to bridle "hate speech." One such law was Ohio's criminal syndicalism law, prohibiting public speech that advocates various illegal activities. (Brandenburg vs Ohio) Brandenburg was a KKK leader speaking at a KKK rally.

Another law prohibited "display of a symbol which "arouses anger, alarm or resentment in others on the basis of race, color, creed, religion or gender." It was used against a man who burned a cross on someone's lawn. (R.A.V. vs City of St. Paul) In a 9-0 unanimous decision, the Court ruled that the First Amendment prevents government from punishing speech and expressive conduct because it disapproves of the ideas expressed.

One last example of attempts to pass laws restricting Free Speech. When members of the Westboro Baptist Church picketed the funeral of a Marine while displaying offensive signs, such as "Thank God for Dead Soldiers," the family of the Marine sued them. (Snyder vs Phelps) The Court held that the First Amendment shields those who stage a protest at the funeral of a military service member from liability.

Now, I don't endorse any of the offensive acts described in these cases. But, I do believe most sincerely that the First Amendment to the Constitution protects offensive speech.


Carl in Tampa

.

Can't disagree...won't disagree.....never disagreed.

Having said that, we are not prevented from condemning a basic movement with every breath, a movement that is totally un American and morally corrupt.

When I read what is said on here, along with statements made by our President, I am allowed to be greatly alarmed that posts on here, and words from the WH are reluctant to condemn a movement based on Nazi's, but are quick to turn on United States citizens who perform tirelessly in our country...FBI, intelligence agencies, and even an ex President or war hero, and do it with no basis.

Yes, the right is there, I keep looking for the moral compass. It appears to be the season for attacking our own and our media without any merit. Having the white house whip up hate for the free press which IS honest, and has never been shown to be otherwise, attacking the people whether he likes them or not, who can help actually make legalative action possible.

But, I am the dumb one. I still think we should have new health care legislation and would have had the "leader" actually worked. He was attacking the bill, those who were working on it and spoke publicly of its "meanness"

Yes, free speech should be protected, but there seems to be more attention being paid to protecting a hate filled Nazi movement than our media, legislators, and hard working citizens if our country.

Rocky...the Nazi's are the liberals on the left. They DEMAND things, they DEMAND we think certain ways, act certain ways, speak certain words...all while the "victims" get to do, say, act, as they please. They create all kinds of laws and regulations so everyone does things that THEY think is "best". Liberals have their thumb on everyone. Conservatives want to be left alone to make their own life...not ruled over in every sense.

It's the liberal way...or the highway...is it not?

WELL, such a huge generalization. While I am conservative by nature and object to much that has gone on, we now have a President who has no legislation passed and with each days verbal attacks on individuals, he lessens the chance of passing any legislation whatsoever.....and we are a country of laws NOT men.

You support and he ran on change but he cannot do it with hate, only reason and compromise.

If you feel it can be mandated and not discussed rationally without the hate, then you actually want and enjoy the hate.

A Jewish friend of mine once told me when I could use a Nazi comparison as you did above. When the one you are comparing them to killed 6 million people. Since then I have never used the comparison.

COPUFF OUT WEST IN THE MILE HIGH STATE.

Liberals killed:

"National Right to Life estimates that, since the U.S. Supreme Court legalized abortion 43 years ago in Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton , more than 58 million unborn children have lost their lives."

58,586,256 Abortions in America Since Roe v. Wade in 1973 | LifeNews.com

58 million mostly white children were killed by the liberals after they fought for abortions. A few more than the 6 million claimed by the Jews.

Liberals are committing genocide on the white race.

Statistics
 

The last few posts seem to have drifted away from the subject of the thread, Assault on Free Speech, but I thought I would make a couple of observations on the statements in yellow, above.

First, the obligatory disclaimer: I abhor abortion. I believe that the Supreme Court made a dishonest, politically motivated decision, without genuine basis, when it legalized abortion on demand.

Having said that, I believe that statistics quoted in the linked article, above, shows that Planned Parenthood is actually engaged in committing genocide on the Black race, not the White Race.

Although the report shows a breakdown of 37.6% of abortions were to White, non-Hispanic women, and 36.7% to non-Hispanic Black women, it must be put in perspective by realizing that Blacks are only 13% of the population, while Whites are 63%.

So, the abortion rate for Blacks (27.8 abortions per thousand women of reproductive age) is nearly four times that of Whites (7.7 per thousand).

Planned Parenthood was founded by Margaret Sanger, who advocated "eugenics" (improvement of the species) by reducing the birth rate of undesirables (which included low-income) who needed to be removed from the gene pool. Methods included both instruction in birth control methods and forced sterilization.

The Black culture seems incapable of realizing that abortion on demand continues to keep them very much a minority population. Down the road they may find themselves a minority in comparison to the Arab Muslims who have been flooding into our country.

Carl in Tampa

.

Don't believe the numbers...

"Do ‘common welfare programs’ pay the equivalent of a $20.83-per-hour job?"

Do ‘common welfare programs’ pay the equivalent of a $20.83-per-hour job? | PolitiFact Rhode Island

Whites are NOT 63% of the population we are now 49%.

Joe Biden "Whites will be a Minority in US by 2017 and that's a good thing " - YouTube

Wow! :22yikes: That is about all that can be said for that post! There are a few other things such as "increase the meds" but I would not go there.

Wow! :22yikes:

Left you speechless, huh?
 

One wonders what you deny:

That the abortion rate for Blacks (almost four times the rate for Whites) will serve to keep Blacks a minority, or

That Arab Muslims (who are not known for visiting abortion clinics) will surpass the Black population sometime in the future?

A wisecracking reply proves nothing.


Carl in Tampa

.

Census figures
 

According to official U.S. Census figures, the White population (not including Hispanic or Latino) of the United States amounts to 63.7%.

BUT, the government adds to that 8.7% who are Hispanic or Latino, because they consider those categories to be "ethnicity" and not "race."

That brings the total White population to 72.4%.

By the way, Joe Biden is an idiot.

An interesting sidelight to the census numbers shows that the lowest percentage of Whites is in the Northeast, with 18.4%. The Midwest has 24.3%; the South has 35.9%; and the West 21.4%.

Carl in Tampa

.