Free Speech, Margaret Chase Smith, John Ashcroft, "Bashing" candidates

[Karmadillo]

With all the talk around here protesting candidate "bashing" and calling for "unity" (before a single vote has been cast), I thought people might enjoy reading the following essay. Won't stop the occasional "mental mute" from contacting the employer of those who speak too freely, but might help remind the rest of us the right to question and criticize those seeking or already possessing the opportunity to exercise "extraordinary power" is one of the things we should be fighting for, not fighting against.

http://baltimorechronicle.com/ashcroftoped_jan02.html

I believe that freedom of speech should not be so abused by some that it is not exercised by others because of fear of smear . . .I believe . . . we must not become a nation of mental mutes blindly following demagogues. I believe that we should never become mental mutes with our voices silenced because of fear of criticism of what we might say.

--U.S. Senator Margaret Chase Smith (R-ME)

Ashcroft Doesn’t Understand the Need for Free Speech
by Paul Peter Jesep

Recently, U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft chided civil libertarians before the Senate Judiciary Committee. "Your tactics only aid terrorists for they erode our national unity and diminish our resolve," he said. "They give ammunition to America's enemies..."

Reality check. Americans who disagree with government don't deserve a smear. The attorney general should use his authority to find truth and fight injustice. He should be humbled by his power. Instead, Ashcroft seems intoxicated by it.

Disagreeing with an attorney general exercising unprecedented power doesn't make an American unpatriotic. The Founding Fathers and Mothers would expect nothing less of today's citizens. Questioning and challenging authority is the basis of the American Revolution. Thomas Paine's rebellious philosophy is the soul of America.

<edit>

Officials in a democratic society with extraordinary power should expect scrutiny. Citizens have a duty to ask sanctimonious potentates tough questions. Otherwise these citizens endanger the liberty they hope to enjoy. Question authority. Challenge it if appropriate.

end

[ibegurpard]

1. Bravo

Masterful job of framing excuses to savage other Democratic candidates. Oh, do you think that making an issue out of the military status of someone's MIA dead brother would fall within your guidelines?

[Karmadillo]

2. Excuses to savage Democrats? I guess that depends

on how you define savaging. I'm thinking a thoroughgoing inspection of a candidate's record is good for all of us, regardless of which candidate(s) we currently support and regardless of how uncomfortable the inspection might make the candidate.

Regarding your second question, it would depend on the facts. Did the candidate lie about the brother's status? Does the response show a pattern of deceit? I'm not familiar enough with the facts of the case you're referring to really say at the moment. The free speech that takes place here at DU and elsewhere will help me reach a more informed opinion.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

3. Dean is the one who made his brother's status an issue

the hypersensitivity being displayed by the Dean campaign to his own screw up is incredible.

[Nadienne]

4. Why so bitter?

Isn't your candidate leading in the polls?