Apparently this is not a joke. It's going to happen later this week:
"The Boston Globe’s editorial page is proposing a coordinated editorial response from publications across the United States to President Trump’s frequent attacks on the news media. ‘‘We are not the enemy of the people,’’ said Marjorie Pritchard, a deputy managing editor of the Globe, referring to a characterization of journalists that Trump has used in the past. The president, who contends he has largely been covered unfairly by the press, also employs the term ‘‘fake news’’ often when describing the media."
‘"I hope it would educate readers to realize that an attack on the First Amendment is unacceptable,’’ she said. ‘‘We are a free and independent press, it is one of the most sacred principles enshrined in the Constitution."
"The Globe has reached out to editorial boards nationwide to write and publish editorials on Aug. 16 denouncing what the newspaper called a ‘‘dirty war against the free press."If I'm remembering correctly from my American History Studies, the First Amendment included the right to say things you disagree with, including the President for that matter? Or, ladies and gentalmen of the press, is the First Amendment only for words you like?
Yet that is exactly what you propose here - to shout down someone you disagree with. May I remind you that "hate speech" is not only in the eye of the beholder because the very term "hate speech" is subjective. The right, even the kooky far right, doesn't show up at a restaurant and verbally & physically assault people. The far left does, routinely. May I remind you that it was the far left that literally prevented then-candidate Trump from speaking in Chicago, and the means by which they did so was through the initiation of violence?
Where is the reporting on the video evidence that over the weekend a mob of "anti-hate" thugs assaulted news crews, left-leaning mainstream media news crews? There was more than one incident yet I haven't seen any criticism of these leftist protesters on that in the so-called "mainstream media." Why not? Cannot two dozen or so people with a point of view that others find abhorrent or offensive speak without being assaulted with bottles, sticks and other assorted weapons? If not then what sort of "Free Speech" and "First Amendment" does the media claim to support?
The First Amendment only guarantees your right to speak; it does not provide a promise that you will be listened to nor does it give you a right to demand a response to your questions. No member of the press has that right. The NY Times does not, CNN does not, MSNBC does not and I do not. The media is free to be as ridiculously biased as it wishes. It is even free to lie about its bias, which it does daily. Indeed it's even free to write gang-style editorials blasting the President. But if they think doing so advances the cause of the First Amendment, their soiled reputation or good standing as the shadow resistance, may I remind them that a mob is a mob is a mob, no matter which side of an argument said mob is on.
Thank You MJA for the Linkage!