Stop attacking Robert Gibbs' first amendment rights.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

That's how it works, right?

Person A criticizes person B.

Person C disagrees with person A.

Suddenly person A's rights are being trampled all over. They're being thrown under the bus. Because it's person A's duty to criticize in a free and democratic society, and anybody who would get in their way is a jackbooted thug of the DLC corporofascistic maleocracy.

I'm pretty sure that's how it works, isn't it? Because that's apparently how it was yesterday.

[mikelgb]

1. You are all over this issue like cancer cells on fructose

your 1st amendment right must be ripped from all the exercise it is getting

[Name removed]

2. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

3. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Sebastian Doyle]

5. I do no such thing.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

7. Sebastian, any body who disagrees with you is a paid corporate troll.

Did you forget?

[MajorChode]

10. Must have

[Sebastian Doyle]

18. Not "anybody"

Just those who are a little too enthusiastic about defending the worst corporations on the planet. ;)

[KansasVoter]

4. Read up on the 1st amendment or add a sarcasm tag!

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

9. I'm not being sarcastic.

And I'm a constitutional lawyer.

[KansasVoter]

11. So who stopped him from saying what he said? And if you really are a lawyer then.....

you know he had the right and ability to say it. And we have the right and ability to call him on it!

[Bluenorthwest]

30. Comedy Gold!

[havocmom]

32. .

:spray:

[asdjrocky]

33. If you are indeed a constitutional lawyer you need to go back to school.

I'm a high school drop out and I know your post is BS.

[Statistical]

44. "And I'm a constitutional lawyer." Not on planet earth.

The 1st amendment protects an individuals free speech won't be INFRINGED BY THE GOVERNMENT not that he won't be criticized or even attacked by private individuals.

The federal govt censors this post = violation of 1st amendment.
DU moderated censors this post = not a violation of 1st amendment.

Given this is high school level civics I wouldn't need to explain it to a "Constitutional Lawyer".

Even if someone physically attacked (or even killed) Gibbs it wouldn't be a violation of his 1st amendment rights. It would simply be one individual engaging in violence crime against another individual.

[jgraz]

58. Hey, I'm a Space Cowboy!

Oh, you mean it isn't "make up a career day" on DU?

[LanternWaste]

60. one true Scotsman says he's a Scotsman. Imagine that.

"And I'm a constitutional lawyer."

Ah... the one true Scotsman says he's a Scotsman. Imagine that.

[Gormy Cuss]

66. And I'm the queen of England.

[Touchdown]

6. Gibbs is clean now!

[Scurrilous]

8. Bingo!!

:P

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

12. God Bless Robert Gibbs. He has (inadvertently) done the evil left a favor.

Not to mention a good laugh at the administration's ham handed attempt to stifle dissent.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

14. "stifle dissent"

See? Exactly what I'm talking about.

Thank you for being so unaware that you've provided that ironic example.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

19. Well, I sure as hell didn't see Gibbs encouraging dissent with his whine.

Rather it, and his lame CYA moment, was a pathetic attempt at telling the Left to STFU and embrace bad policies.

[joeybee12]

13. You do understand the difference between critcize and insult don't you?

You don't you say?

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

15. I know you're feeling insulted, because you know the criticism is valid.

[joeybee12]

17. You can't answer the question, can you...par for the course...

another epic fail...you need a trophy.

[Forkboy]

57. I note this is your last reply of the day.

I know you're just feeling insulted, hence the answers must be valid!

Hurrah and huzzah!

If I liked you I'd be embarrassed for you.... :freak:

[Beetwasher]

16. Do You? Just Wondering, Is Calling Someone A "Corporate Whore"

Or a corporatist or a sellout a criticism or insult? How about saying there's no difference between Dems and Repubs? Is that crticism or insult? Not that YOU are necessarily guilty of this (though you may be), but just wondering, because while I don't remember every post you've made, I've certainly seen these slurs thrown around by supposed "lefty's" on a pretty regular basis.

[joeybee12]

20. Just wondering...the part about ("though you may be)...wow...that'' classic...

the "I can neither conform nor deny" mentality...slam someone and then say you're not sure...oh no, not that' I'd say you're guil, but someone MIGHT.

Nice way to not answer a question...par for your course.

[Beetwasher]

23. Forgive Me For Not Remembering Every Single One Of Your Glorious Posts

I'll assume that's an admission that you have in fact used those slurs against Dems you disagree with and therefore are in no position to lecture about "insults" vs. "criticisms". But I'm sure that won't stop you, so please, do carry on.

[havocmom]

34. amusing comment, considering the OP mentions attacks on 1st

:rofl:

[Beetwasher]

38. What's Amusing Is The Wailing And Gnashing Of Teeth

From people because they feel insulted, when all THEY do is insult.

[havocmom]

39. Working toward a DEM agenda is insulting?

Well, considering what has been done lately, I suppose it is to many.

What was it Harry Truman said about hell and truth?

[Beetwasher]

40. Tearing Down The Democratic President Is Working Towards A Dem Agenda?

Since when? Labeling Obama a "corporate whore/sellout etc", which I've seen countless times on this site, is constructive criticism that holds his feet to the fire so we can further our Dem agenda? Right?

[havocmom]

42. Tearing down a DEM agenda Is a DEM POTUS, or an imposter DEM

Many of us see the latter.

[Beetwasher]

45. Now, Is That An Insult Or Constructive Criticism?

You just can't help making my point for me, can you? :rofl: You need to throw in "corporate whore" for good measure. Come on! You can do it! Don't let me down!

[havocmom]

46. Obama told us we would have to make him do the right thing

So, we work on what he invited us to do. If that doesn't sit well with others, too bad.

[Beetwasher]

48. Yes, Calling Him A "Dem Imposter" Is Really Going To Get Through To Him, Or Anyone For That Matter!

How very constructive and persuasive of you! :rofl:

"Obama! You corporate whore! Do what I demand!"

[havocmom]

56. He has since shown nothing we do matters. He gets his orders from on high

[Beetwasher]

62. No, You've Shown Nothing HE does matters, to you he'll always be a corporate whore

regardless of what he does.

[havocmom]

63. Excuse me? You're calling POTUS a what?

Isn't that a bit over the top?

[Beetwasher]

64. You Tell Me

N/t

[CakeGrrl]

36. The irony is running thick today

When DUers insult the President, they call it their right to criticize.

Today, some actual criticism leveled in the other direction for a couple of perfect examples of hyperbole was dished out and boy are people pissed.

If the President was as thin-skinned as some people on these boards, he would've left the keys to the WH behind a long time ago.

[Forkboy]

54. If the President was as thin skinned as some Duers he would have caved on Health Care.

And wars.

And wiretapping.

Thank the Lord Obama is his own man!

[Forkboy]

53. No, he doesn't understand much.

Don't let the swagger kid you, he's a poser of the highest order.

[leveymg]

21. You really like to stir up and sling those pots of snot, don't you?

"Jackbooted thug of the DLC corporofascistic maleocracy" - Cheezewiz that's double-plus good hatespeak! Got a real talent for it, boy.

[Donnachaidh]

22. can we expect a whiny youtube video next?

And will Gibbs be joining you in the video wearing assless chaps? :sarcasm:

[asdjrocky]

24. Delusional drivel. nt

[Individualist]

25. Leave Robert Gibbs alooooone! Unrec.

[Vickers]

26. He started a religion? n/t

[justanaverageguy]

27. C'mon lawyer man

Surely you understand that attacking what one has said in exercise of his 1st amendment right to do so is not the same as attacking his right to say it. Even if in my opinion what was said amounts to slander. Reasonable people might disagree on the issue of slander but there is not disagreement regarding his free speech rights.

[Johonny]

28. I for one am glad a perfectly bland throw away statement from Gibbs

can turn in 24 hr news cycle non-story that for some raises to level of most important news story of year. Had a Republican made this statement one might accuse them of generating a non-story news story to entertain the masses while real actual issues aren't discussed. Oh well the White House has abandon me I give up threads are a welcome respite from Ipod/Toyota threads.

[Bluenorthwest]

29. You don't seem to understand how the first amendment works

It is pretty basic middle school civics. Free speech is something we all have, so Gibbs says his bit, and he will hear millions of voices in return, all of that is because the 1st says the government can not stop us from doing so. It has nothing to do with private citizens criticizing a public servant.

[havocmom]

31. As I am not the government, First Amendment is not something I can affect

Amazing how that gets confused

[Born_A_Truman]

35. That's so yesterday ...

Today, people are self-identifying with criticism coming back from the WH.

Ironic.

[apocalypsehow]

37. Haahaaaa... the irony is lost on so many repliers. Too much fun. Rec. n/t.

[Statistical]

41. The first amendment protects individual from the government nothing more.

Gibbs has no right not to be mocked, called out or ridiculed or even silenced/ignored by other individuals.

You really should read up on the Bill of Rights.

[derby378]

43. I'm not attacking Gibbs' First Amendment rights - just his smear of liberal Dems as far back as 2004

The ad slowly moved in on a Time Magazine cover featuring bin Laden, zooming in on a close-up of Osama's eyes, while saying that Howard Dean was an unqualified Democratic candidate because of his lack of military or foreign experience.

Tricia Enright, who was the spokeswoman for Howard Dean at the time, summed the ad up best, saying: "Whoever is behind this should crawl out from underneath their rock and have the courage to say who they are." But Robert Gibbs, who was the spokesman for the group, embraced the slime ad against Dean, and refused to say who had funded the ad. Now sure, you can say that Gibbs was just doing his job. But Gibbs wasn't just aligned with the group, he was in the leadership. The group took seed money from crooked former Senator Robert Torricelli to get off the ground, and then went out and raised over a million to run the ad. Gibbs was one of three people that made that ad happen.

http://mydd.com/2007/2/22/robert-gibbs-the-drag-on-obama

Keep in mind, this was way back in 2004.

Gibbs is in bed with those that tried to kill off the Democratic left. He just didn't want you to know that.

Hails and props to madfloridian for unearthing this inconvenient truth.

[LWolf]

47. Criticizing what he said, publicly trashing him for it,

is not attacking his first amendment rights. It's trashing his ideology, his intelligence, his integrity, and his qualifications for his job.

[Uncle Joe]

49. Even though Gibbs may have stated it in a semi-joking manner, he attacked our First Amendment Rights

not the other way around.

Even if you disagree with someone's political opinion, the idea of a "drug test" requirement is anathema to freedom of speech, it's light years from "I will defend to the death your right to say it" and in my view symptomatic of our current Big Brother government mentality.

Thanks for the thread, HiFructosePronSyrup.

[apocalypsehow]

50. LOL! Just when I thought this thread couldn't get any better.

:rofl:

:thumbsup:

[Uncle Joe]

74. Why do you believe our criticism of his criticism of our criticism is somehow attacking his

First Amendment Rights?:shrug:

Freedom of speech doesn't stop with one round, it can go back and forth forever.

[Forkboy]

51. Good Lord, even for you......

[VMI Dem]

65. This would have way more responses and recs if 3/4 of this site didn't have him on ignore.

[Forkboy]

72. What? And give up show business!?!

[TheKentuckian]

52. Nobody is silencing him, you comparison is silly

Gibbs is the one in a paid position in the government with a bullhorn and influence.

[Hello_Kitty]

61. HFPS loves free speech until you gore his ox. eom

[rucky]

55. Because the Press Secretary's job is to express his opinion.

And even if the opinion is misguided or inflammatory, it's his First Amendment right to keep his job which allows him to speak for the White House and have everything he says get widely reported in the media. Press Secretary has always been one of the most secure jobs because of it. I've never heard of one ever getting fired, or anybody getting angry over something they say.

[Hello_Kitty]

59. Do you believe everyone has a free speech right to criticize or is that limited to certain people?

I've noticed with many Champions Of Free Speech^TM that they are remarkably thin-skinned about having their sacred cows criticized.

Porn being a perfect example.

[Arkana]

70. Congratulations on missing the point.

The OP meant that so many folks here on DU exercise their right to criticize the elected leadership of this country every day in whatever manner they deem fit. Fine. Great. Grand.

But Robert Gibbs is human, and an American, too--meaning he's subject to the same frustrations and the same rights as any of you. He's allowed to criticize, even if his remarks were ill-timed and ill-advised.

[Hello_Kitty]

71. Ill-timed, ill-advised, hyperbolic, and dishonest.

Criticizing Obama for continuing certain Bush policies doesn't mean you're saying he's exactly like Bush and no one wants to abolish the Pentagon. To make matters worse, when Gibbs explained his remarks later he claimed he was frustrated because the emergency schools bill was being called a "bailout". Um, it wasn't "professional leftists" who were saying that. It was people like John Boehner. Gibbs created the impression that people from the left were saying that and this was in a prepared statement.

I'd be a little more understanding if this admin didn't jump every time Breitbart or Drudge says boo.

[JonLP24]

73. Stop attacking his first amendment rights

He said he was serious, not sarcastic, and that he was a constitutional lawyer. How are we attacking his first amendment rights?

Sorry if I miss the point(I know you're not talking to me) but I feel the same way the poster you replied to did.

[TexasObserver]

67. Free speech does not mean one must ACCEPT the statements another has freely made.

The right to speak freely is not the right to be free of criticism for having exercised such right.

[Barack_America]

68. *giggle*

[Arkana]

69. You know, I never thought of it this way.

[mmonk]

75. 1st amendment? A government official criticizes the people

and that is a 1st amendment issue? Reverse logic? The government has a right to redress of its grievances with the people?