Sunday, January 05, 2014

The First Amendment and uniforms and leftist hypocrisy

There are those on the left who want to punish people for speech they don't like. The rather stupid comments of the Duck dynasty moron were a classic example of offensive speech. The speech was made by a private citizen and those offended by it have the right to react and boycott. I don't watch Sean Penn films and will walk out of a room where Streisand music or films are played.

Once again we revisit the limits of free speech. In the case of Chris Kluwe whose speech I agree with lines were crossed. When one is a visible member of a public organization one should stay out of the public fray.
In this case Kluwe's job is to kick a football and if he wants to be a pundit he should do so after his career is over. He may be correct that his speech cost him his job. However, those who are cheering loudest for this matter to be investigated speak entirely differently when a lunatic at DHS ran a racist web site calling for racial war. The lunatic who ran that site never identified himself as a federal employee and the views expressed there are repugnant.

Lefties seem to forget this point frequently. Noam Chomsky and other leftist imbeciles trumpet their positions when playing activist 24/7. The fact that the University and the Alumni may not share his off the wall political idiocy is not considered. We had this with the hate group known as OWS where a low IQ Marine and an Ex Philly Cop paraded their uniforms for self promotion reasons. Perhaps if these two clowns found an Indian, a Cowboy and a Construction worker they could sing YMCA next.

When I attend a political rally I do so as a private citizen. I do not wear my work uniform or speak out on behalf of the organization. The media is quite fond of trying to place microphones in people's faces. We actually have a public relations office for that function. I am quite adept at telling members of the media please seek out the office.

Behind closed doors, is a separate matter. Officers do engage themselves on a variety of work related topics and the conversations are not always amicable. While I do not deny the rhetoric is sometimes heated describing this would violate internal ethics. I will say my positions are close to Kluwe's, but who I engaged in these conversations with is a private matter. Those attorneys and coworkers who work with me closely know exactly where my sentiments lie. In fact the attorneys had a better idea then top management.


Duckys here said...

Regarding Chomsky, do you feign ignorance of academic freedom or are you just ignorant of the issue.

beakerkin said...

Really, the clown is free to speak his mind on the subject of linguistics. He represents his University with his foul idiotic views. His employer and alumni need not have their University defamed with his Unamerican and antisemitic obsessions.

beakerkin said...

Unlike Chomsky the racial hatred of Ayo Kimathi was not part of his job.
He never invoked his position or feigned DHS credentials. His odious expressions were classic First Amendment expressions. However, his employer fired him over his odious political views.

The odious views of Chomsky are unrelated to his job. He is merely a Marxist clown abusing the name of his college and should have been terminated long ago.

Duckys here said...

... also, you should be clear that there is absolutely no evidence that Kluwe was released because of his gay marriage statements.

Is jumping to conclusions the trademark of a good "officer"?