Barack Obama

Breaking: Morgan Freeman Censored After Allowing "F*ck Obama" on a Free Speech Wall!


That's Morgan Freeman—obviously not the male African-American actor who donated $1 million to President Obama's re-election effort.

This MF is a student at Sam Houston State University (SHSU) in Huntsville, Texas (about 80 miles north of Houston and Dan Rather's alma mater). Her Students for Liberty chapter put together a "free speech wall" and invited students to write whatever the hell they wanted to write. Entries ranged from listing the college president's salary to calling out cheating lovers to the inevitable "Nazi Punks Fuck Off."

But things got hairy when a professor spied a "Fuck Obama" message—and literally cut it out of the wall. And then the campus cops showed up, telling the students to start censoring free speech.

This video was created by Reason TV alum Ted Balaker for the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE), which stepped in to support free speech at SHSU.

From FIRE's writeup:

Published on Oct 1, 2012 by 

Last year, college censorship took a turn for the ridiculous when a professor at Sam Houston State University vandalized a student-sponsored "free speech wall" with a box-cutting knife to remove anti-President Obama speech he didn't like. When the students complained about the vandalism to the campus police, the police took the professor's side and demanded still more censorship, leading students to dismantle the wall. Morgan Freeman, the student who organized the protest, recounts this amazing and disturbing story in FIRE's latest video. 

Warning: the story involves a four-letter word!

Subscribe to FIRE's YouTube channel to receive automatic updates!

Produced by Ted Balaker. Interview by Greg Lukianoff. Music "Alice in Wonderland" by Emma Wallace (Magnatune Records)

NEXT: Court to Hear Challenge by Mubarak of Life Sentence

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Fuck Obama

    1. And the horse he rode in on.

      1. Hey, the horse probably had blinders on, so take it easy on the horse.

      2. you mean: rainbow-farting unicorn, don’t cha?

    2. I’d rather fuck Morgan Freeman.

      The one whose cheeks DON’T look like rotting mushrooms, I mean.

  2. The Constitution is not a suicide pact!

    1. The Constitution is not a suicide pact!

      (To give my standard answer to that,)

      Nor is it a half-melted gallon of home-made ice cream.

  3. What if some White House intern took that message literally?

    Think of the consequences!

    1. “Presidential kneepads all around!”

  4. It’s not viewpoint discrimination if the viewpoint is heretically wrong.

  5. Her Students for Liberty chapter put together a “free speech wall” and invited students to write whatever the hell they wanted to write. Entries ranged from listing the college president’s salary to calling out cheating lovers to the inevitable “Nazi Punks Fuck Off.”

    But things got hairy when a professor spied a “Fuck Obama” message – and literally cut it out of the wall. And then the campus cops showed up, telling the students to start censoring free speech.

    Wait a minute, isn’t this the 6″ American flag shit I just posted on the previous thread?

    And another thing, this is the second time in the last couple of weeks that someone wrote something on a wall which someone else didn’t agree with, defaced it, and the result is no one gets to speak.

    I’m sensing a pattern here. So the way to shut down speech I disagree with is to criminally deface it… I’m putting this one in the rhetorical toolbelt.

    1. It’s called the heckler’s veto.

      1. No, I know. I was just detailing the similarities between the paticulars.

    2. I’m putting this one in the rhetorical toolbelt.

      I think you need a real toolbelt to actually deface a message.

  6. “We thought the police would help us”

    You should have known better than that.

    1. See, who says college is a waste of money. She and her fellow Campus Liberty members will carry this vital lesson with them for the rest of their lives and no dogs were shot.

    2. “Marge: I thought you said the law was powerless.
      Chief Wiggum: Powerless to *help* you, not punish you.”

      1. That is so depressingly true, as any crime victim who was dumb enough to call the police knows all too well.

    3. See? College still teaches useful things to students!

  7. But things got hairy when a professor spied a “Fuck Obama” message

    But of course he did. You can’t be in education unless you are a fascist.

    1. Lick my academic scrotum.

        1. Braces OK, boxcutter not OK.

      1. Well, you probably can be if you are in math or a non-politicized science.

    2. What are you talking about?
      The professor was standing up for freedom!
      Specifically the freedom from being exposed to anything that may offend you as long as you’re not Christian, white, heterosexual, right of the far left, a meat eater, non-union… you get the point.

      1. It amazes me that there are such people out there. What kind of a tedious fuck gets upset enough about something written on a “free speech wall” to go cut it down?

        1. Tolerant people do not tolerate intolerance.

          The more intolerant you are of intolerance, the more tolerant you are.

          1. ouch.

            Im picking up on the sarcasm…tolerant prof is actually intolerant. However, the truth is that the good guys (FIRE, free speech types) shouldnt tolerate the bad guys (prof, etc) being intolerant. My head hurts now, thanks.

            1. Tolerance means not tolerating intolerance.

              Inclusiveness means excluding intolerant people.

              Equality means intolerant people are inferior.

              So the professor was being tolerant and inclusive in his show of equality.

          2. I had a 1 1/2 hour argument over this exact topic with my “tolerant” American Studies nazi, a few years back.

        2. I got censored at work once because a co-worker hung a Humane Society of the United States calendar on the bulletin board in the kitchen, and I put a post-it on there that said “These puppies and kitties are schilling for a subversive organization.” My note was replaced with one that said “If this calendar bothers you, you should put up a different one.” There was an exchange of post-its and someone removed a copy of the 1st amendment – 2x! The office manager replaced the calendar with one from an insurance agency. My spy told me management was upset about the whole debacle. The person who put up the HSUS calendar, it turns out, was my friend, who thought the whole thing was hilarious, especially when she found out who wrote the original note. She hadn’t participated in any of it, beyond hanging the original calendar. Yeah, it was a government job – a public university.

          1. I used to alter signs in the pantry at work. ie. “Please don’t put buttered bread in toaster” became “Please put buttered bread in toaster”.

    3. Contrary to moronic belief, that isn’t Fascism (spying on people and all that). it’s liberal-progressivism on steroids (opposite of Fascism).

      There was likely more freedom in Nazi Germany than in America today. Hahahaha.

  8. Wait a sec, the prof used a boxcutter? There’s a terrorism charge in here somewhere.

    1. it’s obvious the professor acted stupidly.

  9. Oh, I’m sure that professor just has a lot of respect for the office of the POTUS and would have done the same had it been several years ago and the wall said “fuck Bush”. (Yeah right)
    I wonder what would have happened if they had written “Fuck Obamney”. Tough call.

  10. Technically the wall was on college property, so they have the right to regulate it in a content neutral manner.

    1. Sure they did. But they let phrases like “fuck nazis” stay and cut down the “fuck Obama”. That is not content neutral.

      1. The police weren’t involved in the other vulgarity incidents, so we don’t know that their policy wouldn’t have been the same then.

      2. everybody hates nazis after they bombed pearl harbor

        1. The Nazis didn’t bomb Pearl Harbor. The Chinese bombed Pearl Harbor. The Nazis bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki, while The U.S. bombed the Russians in WWII. We won, too!

          1. And then the UN un-Nazied the world!

    2. I don’t see the content neutrality in this story.

    3. But the article even said that it was not the only instance of “Fuck ____”. And given that it was called a “Free speech wall” it’s pretty shitty to start censoring anything. But free speech seems to be a difficult concept for a lot of people to grasp.

    4. And Tulpa comes out for fascism! What a surprise!

      In other news, the Seahawks lost to the Rams, which is frankly embarrassing as hell.

      1. Property rights are Soooooo fascists.

        1. I’m just kidding, dope.

        2. It is a state school. So it is not private property.

        3. The wall was owned by the student organizations, not the university.

      2. Stupid Seahawks, ruining my great run in the pick ’em. Though I guess that’s actually stupid me, for putting any faith in the Seahawks.

  11. Also, where were all the cute libertarian chicks when I was in college?

    1. Texas, most likely. I’m not sure about their political philosophies, but everywhere, even Lubbock, Huntsville, and College Station have more pretties than you can watch. Well, maybe not, but good numbers.

    2. Getting their brains banged out by a varsity athlete, just like all the rest of the cute chicks.

    3. When I was in college all the libertarians were balding, pudgy, middle aged white guys. They were my role models, and to their credit I ended up just like them.

      1. Hey now! I resemble that remark!

  12. This video should name the professor, relevant administrators, and police officers.

    Perhaps they are legally within their rights to restrict speech. We give up some of our rights by contract when we do things, for example, on a University’s property.

    But one of the reasons petty tyrants can continue to exist within their institutions is we refrain from outing them. We should know, especially, *who* this professor is. At the very least, then, future students at this university can avoid taking classes from him.

    1. If they know it’s a professor and that he used boxcutters, then there must have been witnesses.

      1. I think his name was Mohammed Something-or-other … the boxcutter gave it away.

    2. i think she outs him at 2:03. no volume but they show a math professor’s pic w/ a big finger pointing at his head. and this right after they showed the offending material on the wall.

  13. Maybe Dr. Kirk should go back and grab his box cutters and cut out this website…ouch:…..tid=111643

    1. That site is a scam.

      1. Poor Tulpy-poo, all his students hate him. Right, Anthony?

        1. In 15 years they’ll come back and thank me for offering them an oasis of order amid a sea of weak-kneed disciplinary pansies.

          1. “We offered the world ORDER!”

            1. We tried it once your way, Loki, are you game for a rematch? Loki, I’m laughing at the “superior intellect”.

              1. Kirk, you’re still alive, my old friend.

                1. Hugh, Hugh, Hugh…save your strength. These people have sworn to live and die at my command two hundred years before you were born. Do you mean he never told you the tale? To amuse your Captain, no?

                  1. Episiarch is intelligent but not experienced. His pattern suggests two-dimensional thinking.

            2. To the last, I will grapple with thee… from Hell’s heart, I stab at thee! For hate’s sake, I spit my last breath at thee!

              1. I like Star Wars.

              2. WELSHIE!!!!!

        2. Actually, I have a 4.4 for quality and a 1.8 for easiness. No pepper for “hot?” though.

          1. I have it on good authority that that site is a scam, so what do you care?

      2. Sorry, any teaching evaluation site that has 1/3 of the rating based on “easiness” is a scam. You don’t learn anything from an easy class.

        1. I don’t know if scam is the right word, but it certainly is not aimed at rating the true quality of professors if that’s how they do it.

        2. They are rating the professors intrumentally.

        3. The percieved “easiness” of a class can be affected greatly by the quality or lack there of the proffesor. A professor who teaches a difficult subject but does so competently, has plenty of office hours/ high availability for answering questions outside of class, and genuinely gives a shit about whether or not their students actually learn the material will seem a lot “easier” than one who doesn’t exhibit any of these qualities.

          1. True, the professor’s competence and style can make a hard course easy or an easy course hard, but that’s not all there is. A good professor, imho, does all those things and still makes the course expansive enough that the students have to work hard to get a good grade. In a sense the best situation is for a professor to make a nearly impossible course merely hard, and this is what I strive to do.

    2. AVOID!! This professor is horrible. I would not advise anyone to take him. He does not teach anything and when he tries he even gets his own problem wrong. His test are impossible and he is very boring. He’s always late to class and is rude to students who ask questions.

      Color me shocked!

    3. He only gave three tests for the whole semester and they each had only 15 questions on them, so if you miss one question then pretty much fail.

      I guess he didn’t teach them percentages very well.

      1. My physics 1 class had tests that were 5 question multiple choice with no partial credit. And if you screwed up a sign, you could be sure that answer was there.

        Fortunately, they were weekly and we had 2 drops I think.

    4. If it’s any comfort, he’s a full prof, but gets paid less than all of the assoc profs in the math department, and there’s even an assistant prof that makes more than him.…..ics/15823/

      Something tells me he hasn’t gotten a raise since he got the bump to full prof.

  14. Technically the wall was on college property, so they have the right to regulate it in a content neutral manner.

    Won’t somebody think of the poor Nazi Punks?

  15. Samantha L. Jackson wasn’t available for comment?

    1. Nobody woke her the fuck up.

    2. Oh, there you are. What is “the MRM”?

      1. Sorta random, but I think it’s an abbreviation for “Male Rights Movement.”

        1. Well, what did you mean here?


          1. I was referring to the publicity libertarianism has received since Ron Paul’s 2008 presidential campaign and the backlash. Among accusations I have seen from the left are that libertarians wish to support the kind of “privileged” patriarchal beliefs such as those of the MRM.

            1. Ahh.

              Minor quibble: I can’t say I’m an active member of the men’s rights movement, but I suspect they would contest the idea that they actually hold “patriarchal” beliefs. (Rather, they would say such beliefs are falsely attributed to them by the left.)

              Not that it affects the gist of your point, which is about what the left thinks.

      2. Mr. Rodger’s Meighborhood.

        1. Manatees for Restricting Motorboats.

  16. I guess it never occured to the professor to counter speech with more speech. IOW, he could have just added a “Fuck Romney” message to the wall instead of stamping his feet and getting all butthurt over the fact that someone doesn’t have 0’s cock in their mouth 24/7.

    1. Because free speech means keeping those would abuse it from speaking.

      1. Free speech means being free to say anything you want, as long as authoritah likes it.

    2. My commitment to free speech is tested by the example of YT or Yahoo News comments. If you totally let things be free, it turns into a cesspool.

      A rule against obscenities, vulgarities, personal attacks of private individuals, revealing private information, etc would be fine with me. Those things don’t contribute to the societal discussion.

      1. And of course I’m referring to a rule made by the owner of the medium on which the speech is being written. Not a rule made by govt.

        1. The owners of the medium said “anything goes”.

  17. he could have just added a “Fuck Romney” message

    “FUCK FREEDOM” would have been more to the point.

    1. Or the classic line from ‘Deadwood.’
      A mob is attacking the corrupt county commsioner:

      Hugo: Had you vision as well as sight, you would recognize within me not only a man, but an institution and the future as well.
      Steve: Fuck you, fuck the institution, and fuck the future!
      Hugo: You cannot fuck the future, sir. The future fucks you.

      1. Either that or grade inflation means that

        1. … and,I’m not sure why that partial comment posted. My mistake probably.

          1. And in the wrong place too. So now for the real comment…

            Let me be clear. The future does not belong to those who fuck it.

  18. By the way, libertarian females don’t exist. LALALAALALALA!(I can’t hear you!)LALALALALALAL!

    1. Few of them are political libertarians, but the number of women who just don’t give enough of a shit about politics to either vote, go vegan, or fill guilt about the Hummer they drive is close enough to libertarian as not to be worrisome.

      1. ‘feel’ guilt. I should get that checked out.

  19. So, if the professor has an Obama bumper sticker on his car, dousing it with gasoline and burning it is free speech, right?

    1. Nope. That’s intolerance.

      If it was a Romney sticker than you would be exercising tolerance of the highest order.

  20. Surprisingly linked by Drudge – state thug assaulting woman at a street festival.

    No real reason for the officer to punch her in the face, just thugs doin’ what thugs do I guess. Contempt of cop is a pretty serious crime in Philly, as evidenced by the phalanx of officers ensuring her appropriate comeuppance.

    1. Saw that earlier. She committed the crime of carrying a can of silly string. That’s dangerous stuff.

      Luckily there was a manly cop there to punch her in the face.

      Such a manly man. Bloodying the face of that dangerous woman. I mean, she might weigh a buck thirty, tops?

    2. Does this surprise you at all?

      1. No, but reading the comments was fun. Mixed in with the usual trolls and racist stupidity was a wonderful gem from a bootlicker in California:

        The cop was just trying to knock the can of silly string out of her hand and accidentally hit her in the face. (No, he wasn’t being ironic. He even followed up his argument when questioned.)

        That’s high marks for creativity in bootlicking.

        1. That’s impressive bootlicking.

        2. Hey now! Those boots won’t lick themselves you know!

        3. Positively Tulpical.

        4. Do you have any idea how many people are killed by Silly String each year?

          1. Do you have any idea how many people are killed by Silly String each year?

            Not enough?

        5. Clearly this goes against Obama’s dictum against slandering the prophet of Islam.

  21. Stupidest Professor in Texas.

    1. Its a big state, man. That’s a bold statement.

  22. I’m in a Young Americans for Liberty college chapter and I think a free speech wall is something we’ll definitely do in solidarity for this group.

    1. How many hot chicks in your chapter. Back in my day, libertarianism was a sausage fest. And we walked to college, uphill, both ways. Get off my lawn, and all that.

  23. Can’t believe no one has mentioned how adorable she is compared to the other Morgan Freeman.

    1. Can’t believe we had to wait for a woman to make this point.

    2. She needs to sit up straight. She’s doing her breasts no favors.

    3. Well that’s a much nicer way of putting it than most guys here would.

    4. We’re trying not to be so male chauvinist since that study came out saying libetarians are the most masculine of political types. You know, to attract more cute wimmenz.

      1. We’re trying not to be so male chauvinist

        *grits teeth*

        *Covers Mouth with hands*

        *Can’t. Hold. It. In.*


        Sorry. I tried.

        1. Pardon me but the correct term is “bazongas”.

      2. Shhh, don’t let them know the plan!

  24. I would totally fuck her.

  25. If she was smart she would have also wrote “Fuck Bush” (or any non Liberal) as well. The professor’s head would have blown up like one of those robots in the 1950’s movies that get conflicting orders.

    1. He would have still cut out the “Fuck Obama” message, but would have simultaneously came in his pants over the “Fuck Bush” one.

    2. There was a “fuck bush” in there. No doubt the professor would have also objected to it if it had been writ as large as the imperative regarding Obama.

  26. That reminds me of that video of a student who got yelled by a teacher because he asked a question about Obama last May.

  27. If Obama were smart, he’d fly down there and write it back up there himself. That’s a golden opportunity to do something awesome.

    1. Obama doesn’t do awesome. He does awful.

    2. A) “If”
      B) The President can’t write Fuck. It would be a scandal. He would have to write “*@#! Obama”.

      1. B)Send Joe Biden.

  28. Sounds like some totally crazy stuff to me dude.

  29. Is it bad I heard this entire post in the actor Morgan Freeman’s voice?

  30. She needs to sit up straight. She’s doing her breasts no favors.

    This reminds me of that one time…

    There was this waitress in a place I liked to frequent; very pretty face, but crappy/slouchy posture (which i hatez). For some reason, she suddenly decided to stand up straight, and lo! lovely breasts; not massive, but well-formed and youthfully indifferent to gravity. An eye-opener, so to speak.

  31. Prohibiting the display of the word “fuck” on openly accessible public property probably is allowable under “time, place manner” restrictions that the Supreme Court has recognized as an exception to the First Amendment. The government can set limitations on the time, place and manner of speech in public fora, though such restrictions cannot be content-based. It might be a close call, but I’m guessing it would be upheld.

    The professor removed only the word “fuck” from the display (which was modifying both “Obama” and “Bush” in that particular segment).

    Does that mean I agree with Professor Boxcutters? Nah. Sounds like a autocratic asshole.

    1. You can wear a T-shirt in a courtroom reading “Fuck the Draft,” but you can’t put “Fuck Obama” on a free speech wall?

    2. Even if the university has that authority — and it probably doesn’t, considering this is a university and not K-12 — an individual professor doesn’t have that authority. You might be able to make that argument for the campus cops, but not for a math professor.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.