As any high-profile Twitter user with a Jewish-sounding last name can tell you, the surest way to see anti-Semitism flood your mentions column is to tweet something negative about Donald Trump. My anti-Trump tweets have been met with such terrifying and profound anti-Semitism that I bought a gun earlier this month. Over the coming weeks, I plan to learn how to shoot it better.
This is a new political phenomenon, and one which I'm not pleased to hear about.
I've mentioned before that I'm not totally pleased with the depiction of Donald Trump as a "Conservative" Republican candidate (it's difficult to envision a "Conservative" who is more conservative than I am), but now we're seeing some shrapnel from the bomb-burst which is the Trump campaign.
It seems that "The Donald" has attracted some followers who are ... very outspoken. I can accept that, but I don't accept the degree of
Is it real, or is it memorex?
It's hard to know whether the people who are hateful are actual "Trump Supporters" or people who are deliberately posing as such, as a method of driving voters away from the Trump campaign.
I do not like anti-semitic speech, I've said before that "I may not agree with what you say, but I will support your right to say it".
But there's a limit to free speech, and that limit is reached when the First Amendment is used as an excuse to staunch the free expression of others.
(Yes, I'm aware that statement implies a limit to the Second Amendment as well. But that's a subject for another discussion.)
I don't think it's "A Bad Thing" that the originator of the article has decided to acquire a firearm for personal protection; as long as she seeks training about how to safely keep and bear arms, she will probably be safer with than without it.
(My assumption is that she is entirely without experience, and it's only reasonable that she finds at least as much instruction in bearing arms as she did when she took "Drivers' Education" in High School.)
Still, I'm appalled that she has been rendered so in fear for her personal security that she seeks to bear arms BECAUSE SOME ONLINE JERK CONFRONTED HER POLITICAL CHOICE!!
3 comments:
Progressives and Islamist's are anti-Semitic, and anti-Christian. It's all part of our brave new world.
But there's a limit to free speech, and that limit is reached when the First Amendment is used as an excuse to staunch the free expression of others.
(Yes, I'm aware that statement implies a limit to the Second Amendment as well. But that's a subject for another discussion.)
As the saying goes, "Your right to swing your fist ends at the tip of my nose."
There's a limit to free speech, and in the case of Trump rallies vs. anti-Trump mobs, that limit is when "free speech" is used as an excuse to silence someone else's free speech. The "Heckler's Veto" (layman's definition) is most likely not protected by the First Amendment.
That does indeed imply a limit to the Second Amendment, but that limit is basically this: I can keep and bear all the arms I wish, but I cannot exercise my right to keep and bear arms in such a way that prevents you from exercising yours (absent supply/market constraints).
I believe that's a limit we can all agree with.
Did anybody think that these anti-Semitic Trumpists might actually be Hillary or Bern plants? That is a tactic leftists have used in the past.
Post a Comment