Freedom of Assembly

After Violent Attack, Portland Mayor Calls for Abandoning First Amendment

For the millionth time, there's no "hate speech" exemption.

|

Mayor Ted Wheeler
John Rudoff/Polaris/Newscom

The mayor of Portland, Oregon, has strong words for those who would sow fear in his city and attempt to shut down citizens' rights to free expression: "I surrender."

On Friday, two men were stabbed to death on a train in Portland while confronting and trying to calm down a man who was allegedly loudly harassing two young women with anti-Muslim comments.

Mayor Ted Wheeler's response to this brutal attack was to essentially tell the world that violence can successfully be used to convince the government to shut down civil liberties. In a rather self-absorbed speech Monday that treats this horrible but isolated event as though it were some sort of mass slaughter deserving of a permanent monument and some sort of "leadership" by politicians, Wheeler is demanding that the federal government cancel the permits for a couple of upcoming "alt-right" rallies in Terry Schrunk Plaza.

He flat out said in his comments that the city would refuse to grant rally permits to alt-right groups based on their views. However, the plaza right by Portland City Hall is actually federal property, and Wheeler is trying to get federal authorities to revoke the permits for the groups involved in a pair of June events.

And while there's some gesturing toward the idea that he wants the city to have time to grieve, he wouldn't be making such demands if the stabber had been yelling just incoherent nonsense and not an anti-Muslim rant. That's because Wheeler makes it very abundantly clear that he believes the people organizing these rallies are bigots and he doesn't want them around. He's using this violence as a way of curtailing the First Amendment right to both peacefully assemble and engage in free speech.

In response to those who point out that the alt=right has the same First Amendment protections as the rest of us, Wheeler actually says, "Hate speech is not protected by the First Amendment of the Constitution." (It's at about 6:54 in this clip of his comments.)

There is no "hate speech" exemption to the First Amendment, and it's bad enough when poorly educated college students believe that there is. We don't need politicians who run cities reinforcing the idea that such speech is not protected, because it feeds the idea that violent protests against certain speakers is therefore some form of heroic rebellion. He reinforces the mentality that threats, and even just fears, of violent responses are acceptable reasons to prohibit public protests.

This excuse is used by authoritarian regimes everywhere as a mechanism of suppressing speech. Once you send the message that violence will be used as a pretext to shut down the expression of certain opinions, violence is exactly what you'll get. Turkish authoritarian President Recep Erdogan claims that anybody speaking out against him is part of a violent plot to remove him in order to justify using government violence back against the critics.

At this point we should be less inclined to think that the "hate speech exemption" refrain reflects a person's ignorance of the First Amendment and more inclined to see it as a deliberate effort to will an idea into reality and to change everybody's perception of where speech's legal limits actually are.

Fortunately the American Civil Liberties Union's chapter in Oregon is tweeting back at the mayor, warning him that attempting to shut down rallies on the basis of disagreeing with the content is literally what the First Amendment is meant to prevent:

Protecting these rallies is one of the reasons taxpayers are asked to fund the police. Making sure violence cannot be used to suppress our rights to speak freely and to practice our various religions is one of the reasons we have a government police force. Maybe Wheeler should spend more time dealing with those responsibilities and less trying to take the lazy way out.

Advertisement

NEXT: Another libel takedown order

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 Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

    1. Let me guess, she is a freelance English teacher, specializing in grammar?
      That is how she done it.

      1. The suppression of hate speech is a self-realizing myth that will eventually become a reality in our great nation, just like the criminalizing of inappropriately deadpan “parody” that makes a point and stirs up controversy of interest to no one. Surely no one here would dare to defend the “First Amendment dissent” of a single, isolated judge in America’s leading criminal “satire” case? You can assert as much as you like that such “speech” is protected by the “grand principles of free and open exchange of ideas,” yada yada, but we know how to get around the “First Amendment” when we have to. See the documentation at:

        https://raphaelgolbtrial.wordpress.com/

        1. I’m making over $7k a month working part time. I kept hearing other people tell me how much money they can make online so I decided to look into it. Well, it was all true and has totally changed my life.

          This is what I do… http://www.webcash10.com

        2. Please give it up, no one here believes any of your crap. This case had nothing to with satire and everything to do with fraud, which is what the trial was about. No First Amendment protection for fraud, thank you for playing.

  1. I waver between hating politicians for their stupidity and hating them for their mendacity.

    So most of the time I hate them for their mendacious stupidity and their stupid mendacity.

    1. This looks like literal hate speech. The author should be denied a platform for xis hateful opinions, and criminally prosecuted if xe attempts to evade the ban. /Mayor Wheeler

    2. It’s the stupid mendacity that bugs me the most. I expect a certain amount of dishonesty, but at least have enough respect for me to tell somewhat credible lies. Telling really stupid and obvious lies and then acting like you actually expect me to believe them just insults my intelligence.

      Then there’s the Trump/Clinton approach: does it really count as lying, if you’re so delusional you actually believe your own bullshit? Not that this is an improvement.

      1. Accepting as truth obvious falsehoods is a test of loyalty to the cause. No one expects you too pretend to believe now but when this becomes the norm they will be asking children in school what parents talk about at home. Accepting tyranny will not be enough, you will have to pretend to love it.

  2. I find the mayor’s speech hateful. He is hereby prohibited from ever speaking again.

    1. I am in favor of limiting government speech.

      The less politicians speak, the better.

  3. Christ, what an asshole.

    1. Also, Christ, what a bigot.

  4. the liberal answer to everything…take away the guns, take away free speech, and it goes on from there

    1. The Trump answer: let’s take a look at the libel laws so we can suppress free speech that makes fun of me.

      1. WTF does that have to do with any of this? Or are you visiting this article while jerking yourself off bitterly to your 8x10glossy of Trump?

        1. Sellouts got to sell out. They’re looking for that common ground with progressives, even if that means abandoning all shred of principle. Hell, it is a perfect comparison. One guy says something then nothing is done on his asinine thought and the other people literally use violence and the state to silence speakers. Exactly the same

          1. Also note the categorical difference between preventing speech and seeking redress for the consequences of speech.

    2. “the liberal answer to everything…and use racism like ketchup. Put it on everything.

    3. How ’bout let’s play Word Scramble and take away the liberal mayor?

  5. The left doesn’t believe in free speech. So this just earns him bonus points in Portland.

    1. Free health care, free public transportation, free everything which requires theft from others, but no free speech.

      1. The modern left’s mindset summarized:

        Free Shit = Yes
        Freedom = No

        1. It’s the new social contract: you/government give us free shit, we [but especially you] give up freedom.

        2. Free doms, though! They’re more than willing to provide people who will order you around and punish you for disobeying!

    2. The right says that the ACLU is the left. If that’s so the left believes in free speech and the mayor is just a snowflake.

      1. They hates the mayor more than they hates the right it there, if you can believe that.

      2. The ACLU does have a leftist agenda. For a true free speech advocate, take a look at the ACLJ.

        1. My recollection as well.

          At least the ACLU is doing right this week.

        2. > The ACLU does have a leftist agenda.

          You think? The ACLU is actually opposing a bill in Maine to bring more harsh penalties for forced genital mutilation of minors. How in the hell is forcefully mutilating a young girl’s genitals tantamount to respecting her civil liberties?

          http://washingtonfeed.com/aclu…..-bill.html

      3. The ‘right’ might say that, but so do former ACLU board members, like Alan Derschowitz who find it odd when the ACLU has an opinion on healthcare reform

      4. > The right says that the ACLU is the left. If that’s so the left believes in free speech and the mayor is just a snowflake.

        It used to be the American Civil Liberties Union. Now, it’s more like the Aging Communist Leftover Union

    3. Progressives believe in a diversity of their own views.

      1. > Progressives believe in a diversity of their own views.

        Up until a white progressive gets married, has kids, and moves to the suburbs. Then he/she is a racist whose earnings were ill-gotten.

        I always laugh when I hear white millennial social justice warriors say they want to make a career out of fighting racism. They are going to be accused of it as soon as the next generation of SJWs hits the universities.

  6. “Protecting these rallies is one of the reasons taxpayers are asked to fund the police. Making sure violence cannot be used to suppress our rights to speak freely and to practice our various religions is one of the reasons we have a government police force. Maybe Wheeler should spend more time dealing with those responsibilities and less trying to take the lazy way out.”

    So now they’ll still have their rally but the police will mysteriously stand down as a well-organized group of “anarchists” show up?

    1. So now they’ll still have their rally but the police will mysteriously stand down as a well-organized group of “anarchists” show up?

      “You’ve been here before, haven’t you?”

      1. And about that time I would arrange to have a few hundred pissed off bikers show up to provide ‘security’……. unofficially.

    2. Funny thing, and a new thing for me, is that that park next City Hall is FEDERAL land.. and thus Portland Police Bureau have no authority there, nor does the mayor. I am convinced this ticks HIM off royally…. he’s on a whinge grovelling before FedGov to support him in denying the permits for the rallies. Back when the kinyun was king, it would have been an easy sell. Not Trump is President, if the trickle has run down into Portland by now I doubt he’ll get his way. SO maybe we’ll get to watch HIM throw a temper tantrum cuz “I dint git my WWWWWWAAAAAAAAHHHHHYYYYyyyyy..

      Maybe Oathkeepers and the Three Percenters would provide REAL security as they did in Ferguson when that corrupt mayor ordered the local coppers to stand down.

      1. Nailed it. He’s pissed off because the event organizers did an end run around his efforts to block them.

        No way they would have ever been granted a city permit.

        Ans also note that, should anyone attempt to impede the event they are opening themselves up to Federal charges.

    3. The Police will only stand down after they’ve disarmed the Alt-Right.

  7. “There is no “hate speech” exemption to the First Amendment…”

    Get with it, Shackford. If you repeat something often enough, it becomes fact. See also, 5/4s of all female college students are raped during their educational tenure, women make 10% of men for the same work, etc.

    Also can we get all of these Antifa assholes, anti-Antifa assholes, Turkish presidential bodyguards, etc., into a cage that’s, say, two football fields in size and let them really have at it?

    1. Also can we get all of these Antifa assholes, anti-Antifa assholes, Turkish presidential bodyguards, etc., into a cage that’s, say, two football fields in size and let them really have at it?

      I’d buy that for a Dollar.

  8. We don’t need politicians who run cities reinforcing the idea that such speech is not protected

    He doesn’t “run” the city you statist hack fraud!

    1. +1 missing “i”

    2. Exactly!! This being Portland, he uses a “bike”

  9. a few years in federal prison for depriving people their civil rights would give Ted some time to bone up on the BoR. He could do a book report on the 2nd, 3rd, & 4th for the parole board.

    1. Did you just assume his literacy level? Privilege much?

      1. oh, it’s there.. 2nd Grade, 3rd Grade, 4th Grade….

        1. Clown college.
          I haven’t clowned in years!

  10. Turkish authoritarian President Recep Erdogan claims that anybody speaking out against him is part of a violent plot to remove him in order to justify using government violence back against the critics.

    As cynical as we can be, let’s appreciate that this kind of thing doesn’t happen in America.

  11. At this point we should be less inclined to think that the “hate speech exemption” refrain reflects a person’s ignorance of the First Amendment and more inclined to see it as a deliberate effort to will an idea into reality and to change everybody’s perception of where speech’s legal limits actually are.

    This.

    It seems like it’s only taken a couple of years for these shitsticks to go from “I believe in free speech, but…” to just simply claiming that there’s some kind of “hate speech” exemption – with “hate speech” defined as any speech they disagree with – as if it’s somehow settled case law.

    I’m not sure if this assclown actually believes it, or if he’s just virtue signaling to the Portlandia Progtards. Or just using this to get his name out there in preparation for a Senate run in the near future. Probably a little bit of all three.

    Fuck off, Wheeler.

    1. It seems like it’s only taken a couple of years for these shitsticks to go from “I believe in free speech, but…” to just simply claiming that there’s some kind of “hate speech” exemption – with “hate speech” defined as any speech they disagree with – as if it’s somehow settled case law

      Sort of like how it took one Presidential term for identifying the Russians as American’s #1 threat to be called “1980s policy,” to complaining that said Russians hacked the election and anyone remotely associated with them was committing treason.

    2. Don’t try to debate with them, as they will immediately conflate your support for free speech as being an “enabler” of hatred.

      There’s more “irony” there than in any Portlandian’s wardrobe.

    3. Portland elected the clown, therefore he believes this stuff, and has for a long time. Long enough for Portland to know it. THAT is why HE’s the Lord HIGH Mayor and not someone else.

  12. Wait. Do they even have the First Amendment all the way up in Portland?

    1. Not so’s you could notice.

  13. That is a very mockable face. It looks like a butt.

    1. I’m not sure what kind of butts you’ve been looking at.

      1. Plumber’s crack. There. I said it.

    2. That is the face of a man suffering from kale poisoning. Other symptoms include raging assholism and willfully misunderstanding basic philosophical and legal concepts.

      1. That is the face of a man suffering from kale poisoning.

        More like an excess of soy.

        1. Soy is estrogenic. If a dude eats too much soy, he gets bitch tits. Unfortunately the pic is from the neck up, and i don’t feel like searching for pictures of this asshole, so we can’t tell here.

  14. So crazy dude spouting Muslim nonsense and then hurts someone = isolated incident, nothing to see here, Islam is love, etc.

    Crazy dude spouting anti-Muslim nonsense and then hurts someone = hate speech isn’t protected, don’t let the “alt-right” speak, Republicans are evil, etc.

    Got it.

    1. Well, as Oscar Wilde said “each man kills the thing he loves”. So Islamic terrorists just have a lot of love for a lot of people.

      1. I have killed a lot of bacon in my time.

  15. Notice that the “haters” are all right wingers. When leftists express their bottomless hatred it’s always called tolerance or righteous outrage.

  16. *Obligatory “Fuck that guy” comment*

    Also, didn’t it come out that this guy was a Jill Stein voting Bernie Bro? Which means that the violent rhetoric of the Green party will also be targeted by Fuck That Guy?

    1. No, the Green’s violence is not motivated by “hate”, don’t you know?

      1. Anyway, vegans don’t have enough energy to be violent.

        1. Some vegan chicks are crazy enough to be very energetic fucks though.

          1. +1 Mary Moon

    2. Unnecessary details. It’s all Osmosis: Someone talking bad about Muslims is automatically Trump’s fault – and definitely not, say, Muslim terrorists – even if the fellow openly hates Trump.

      Like how the communist Oswald killing Kennedy was really the fault of the right-wing atmosphere of Dallas.

  17. “Hate speech is not protected by the First Amendment of the Constitution.”

    Any politician who says this should be run out of office on a rail.

    1. Hanged, disemboweled and drawn and quartered.

    2. Instead this walking diaper stain probably just guaranteed his re-election by a landslide.

      1. Why do you thing he said what he did in the first place? He knows his constituency.

    3. I would settle for being slapped down by federal court and impeached, in either order.

      1. I would like to see him get bitched slapped in public by someone while they lecture him about the finer points of the constitution.

  18. Paging Jimmy Neutron: Your dad is acting the fool, please send Goddard to collect him.

  19. “There is no “hate speech” exemption to the First Amendment, and it’s bad enough when poorly educated college students believe that there is.”

    New interpretation: Since “hate speech” isn’t expressly permitted, it’s banned.

    They’re just going to keep saying it until the next crop of law school grads and judges start enforcing it.

    1. If there is no law saying its okay then assume its not or so we were told a few weeks ago by some other city leaders

  20. Hey guys you used the wrong time for the video, the time is actually at around 12:05 with 6:54 LEFT in the video.

  21. Wheeler is demanding that the federal government cancel the permits for a couple of upcoming “alt-right” rallies in Terry Schrunk Plaza.

    Why does a gathering of people require a permit?

    1. Because “land of the free”? /sarc

    2. Why does a gathering of people require a permit?

      Everything requires a permit in Progtardia.

      Except being a Proggie.

      1. And ex nay on any cultural appropriating food trucks!

    3. And why is the permit from the Federal Government? Don’t they have more important things to do than breaking the First Amendment? Portland can do that on their own.

    4. I can think of some reasons why requiring a permit for a planned gathering in a particular piece of public/government property might be desirable. Not sure how to reconcile that with the first amendment right to free assembly guarantee.

      The mayor’s apparent desire to further restrict assembly based on viewpoint or ideology is definitely right out.

      1. I think the permit makes sense as a scheduling tool.

        It just shouldn’t be used as a tool to deny speech.

        1. Yep, obtaining such a permit should be no more onerous than taking a number at the property tax window.

      2. Same reasons as requiring a permit for the second amendment; to protect the children from constitution following crazies. If they can get you to believe you need a permit, they can get you to believe they have the right to deny the permit.

  22. At this point we should be less inclined to think that the “hate speech exemption” refrain reflects a person’s ignorance of the First Amendment and more inclined to see it as a deliberate effort to will an idea into reality and to change everybody’s perception of where speech’s legal limits actually are.

    Unfortunately, I’m coming to the conclusion more and more that people aren’t making good-faith arguments, they’re just throwing everything out there and seeing what sticks in a win-at-any-cost battle for control of the language and the terms of the debate. When there’s no use arguing with anybody anymore because they aren’t actually willing to argue, just call you names and throw out wild accusations and hysterical cry-bully complaints, there’s just face-punching left.

    1. I’m coming to the same conclusion.

    2. True that.

    3. Official Leftist doctrine is that speech is simply manipulation with words. The only truth by which to judge words is their efficacy in manipulation.

      It’s not that they’re lying, it’s that any correspondence to reality is simply beside the point.

      1. They’ll tell you that reality is only in the eye of the beholder.

  23. Back when Obama was president, this might have been chalked up as a naive belief that the definition of hate speech would be made by people who agreed with him. With Trump as president, I frankly have no idea what progs are thinking. Do they really want Trump and his minions deciding whether prog speech is hate speech? Are they so naive not to see that this can be used against them when someone they consider to be the spawn of satan is the current president?

    1. Courts are sticking their necks out to defy Trump, maybe they think it can continue.

      1. If it does, I’m waiting to see how long it will take for everyone to figure out that the progs need to be overthrown.

        1. Nice anagram, ‘alias fakename’.

    2. Are they so naive not to see that this can be used against them when someone they consider to be the spawn of satan is the current president?

      “You today, me tomorrow” is a concept that a lot of people seem to struggle with.

      1. Except it’s actually “me today.” Does this idiot think that Trump is going to revoke permits for people who largely support him?

        1. Isn’t Trump’s “admin” opening the number of refugees admitted? I think the bureaucrats in most of the departments hate Trump and will counter him wherever they can.

        2. Probably not. I think he’s most likely just virtue signaling to the other brain-deads in Portland and cynically using this to get his name out there.

        3. Trump is not going to see the application; it will be some left coast bureaucrat appointed by Obama to rule the masses in the name of freedom. And any appeals will go to the fully impartial ninth circuit court, which considers newspapers more authoritative than executive orders.

      2. They honestly seem to believe that these sorts of restrictions will only apply to Ungoodthink.

      3. “You today, me tomorrow” is a concept that a lot of people seem to struggle with.

        The Left has gotten away with it for 100 years. Why would they stop now?

        Who is the most guiltiest man in the room?

    3. Consequences and foresight are so privileged. Triggered.

      1. That’s right. A “future time orientation” is white supremacy.

    4. They see the Trump presidency as a temporary aberration caused by Russian interference in the election. Things will get back to normal after Trump is arrested and Obama moves back into the White House.

    5. Are they so naive?

      I believe the concept of any righteous authority other than themselves just isn’t in the cards for them. Probably about as much appreciation of the tables being turned on them as the Bolsheviks in 1917.

  24. He’s a lefty, so he’s “all for the 1st Amendment, but…”

  25. For the millionth time, there’s no “hate speech” exemption.

    Yet.

  26. Dear Mayor, the hate speech did not harm anyone on that train. It was a physical violence that did. How about getting rid of the sticks and stones instead of getting rid of the words?

    1. And we don’t know at this point who initiated the violence.

      1. Hasn’t the video been released?

        Those buses have video recording systems..

        1. I haven’t seen any video, and I’ve been looking for information about the incident. From what I’ve read so far, the stabbings could have been in self-defense.

          1. I don’t know, but if a couple or three “heroes” were threatening me, I might fear for my life or bodily harm to my person and defend myself with whatever I had at hand. People don’t usually pull a knife and stab several people without provocation of some kind.

            1. Good to see a couple of Nut-Cons from the FEderalist have shown up to defend a deranged lunatic. Well done, assholes.

    2. Sounds like you’ll sacrifice the Second Amendment just to keep the First Amendment.

      I would think both are non-negotiable.

      1. Sacrificing the second just eliminates the first – – – –
        Both are in the constitution no matter what politicians say about the children.

    3. It is said that we credit the Enlightenment with making a distinction between words and actions.

      That of course was all privileged patrimony [Catherine the Great not withstanding of course] talking; time to overthrow that nonsense and outlaw what we need to outlaw.

  27. In response to those who point out that the alt=right has the same First Amendment protections as the rest of us, Wheeler actually says, “Hate speech is not protected by the First Amendment of the Constitution.”

    Progtards gonna progtard.

    That is all.

  28. This mayor looks like he’d fuck sheep.

    1. I disagree. This bets make piece of shit strikes me as one who would be the power bottom in that equation. Just like he probably is at the bath house.

  29. He flat out said in his comments that the city would refuse to grant rally permits to alt-right groups based on their views.

    Ironic given that the killer likes Stein and Sanders, not the “alt right”.

    “Hate speech is not protected by the First Amendment of the Constitution.”

    Weird, given that the Amendment is there SPECIFICALLY to protect “hate speech”. Popular speech doesn’t need protections as is.

    Maybe Wheeler should spend more time dealing with those responsibilities and less trying to take the lazy way out.

    No “taking the lazy way” involved. If a far right group threatened to violently suppress an antifa rally, he’d be finding ways to stop that.

    1. His announcement is a great way for groups denied permits to sue Portland into bankruptcy. In fact, any entertprising folks out there should start an ‘alt-right group’ (whatever the fuck that actually is) and apply for multiple permits in Portland. Just have a savage litigator ready to file suit

      Since most of the taxpayers in Portland are progtarded idiots, the whole thing is win-win. Making the commie municipality poorer also results in more hardship for the progtard citizenry.

  30. Whatever happened to freedom of assembly? I don’t think I’ve ever seen a Reason article defending this sacred right, despite the fact that one apparently needs permission from the federal government to assemble. As much as free speech is under attack, at least permission to speak is not required.

    1. mtrueman|5.30.17 @ 2:07PM|#
      “Whatever happened to freedom of assembly? I don’t think I’ve ever seen a Reason article defending this sacred right,”

      That’s because you never bother to read anything before posting more of your inane bullshit.

      1. It appears that needing a federal permit to gather doesn’t strike anyone here as an infringement on their sacred rights.

        1. mtrueman|5.30.17 @ 5:16PM|#
          “It appears that needing a federal permit to gather doesn’t strike anyone here as an infringement on their sacred rights.”

          Still don’t get it, I see.

  31. Hate speech is not protected by the First Amendment of the Constitution.”

    What an absolutely terrifying statement.

  32. This excuse is used by authoritarian regimes everywhere as a mechanism of suppressing speech.

    There you go. You should harbor NO DOUBT that the mayor of Portland is an authoritarian.

  33. Please don’t use pejorative terms like “alt-right” just because one side wants to smear all their political opponents with the broad brush of racism. Even truly offensive groups have the right to free speech, and they’re not “inciting violence” if their political opponents attempt to use violence to silence them.

    One group the mayor wants to ban is “March Against Sharia” which seems like a true alt-right group intolerant of one of the world’s major religions. The other is “Trump Free Speech Rally” which seems at least to be supporters of the President of the United States (not some fringe wacko) and the First Amendment to the US Constitution, the fundamental law of the land. How exactly is a group supporting a mainstream politician and a mainstream American value “alt-right”?

    1. I believe Scott put “alt-right” in quotes because he agrees with your first sentence, and I think that’s correct.

      1. I don’t possess Reason Commenter Mind-Reading Power, so I should not say that he definitely does agree, but it seems as though if he agrees with your first sentence.

    2. “Please don’t use pejorative terms like “alt-right”

      Doesn’t seem to be as pejorative as you think it is. There are many who proudly refer to themselves as “alt-right.” and there are even sympathetic websites sporting the name. If you have a name you prefer over alt-right, it may be too late so the sooner you make your case, the better.

      1. isn’t alt-Right now anything on the right

        1. Pretty much.

    3. One group the mayor wants to ban is “March Against Sharia” which seems like a true alt-right group intolerant of one of the world’s major religions.

      Huh. I thought “alt-right” was the polite term for conservatives to the right of the mainstream. Why are you so concerned about liberal charges of racism?

      I wonder why being intolerant of somebody’s elaborately-constructed fantasy world that drives them to curtail my liberties (and the liberties and occasionally lives of others, like their own daughters) is considered “true alt-right” or “truly offensive.” Is being against Sharia law, when you’re an American who believes in reason and liberty, a bad thing?

  34. More attacks on Constitutional liberty. They always come in the form of “this is really an exceptional case” or something like “this is for public safety”.

    Portland’s mayor didn’t even bother with that. He simply wants free speech stopped because of the ideas themselves.

    Sorry Mr Mayor, you don’t marginalize authoritarian speech by being an authoritarian yourself.

  35. The mayor of Portland, Oregon, has strong words for those who would sow fear in his city and attempt to shut down citizens’ rights to free expression:

    Shorter Mayor Wheeler: “We don’t lahk yer tahp ’round here.”

    1. Just SOME rights to free expression; it’s a trend he is hoping takes off.

  36. When I lived in Baltimore, there was this guy known “Crazy Mike” who would walk up and down the street screaming “F-ing N-word” at the top of his lungs (he was white). So would Portland now be violating the ADA by not allowing him his outbursts?

    1. You can type “nigger”. We’re adults here.

      1. Oh, and “fuck”.

  37. That mayor sure has a mega-punchable face. I’m surprised he could go out in public to campaign for office without getting clocked into the hospital every other day.

    1. We’re talking Portland, Dick-anyone with the slightest inkling of non-collectivism is run out of town by the Antifa…

  38. Hate speech is not protected by the First Amendment of the Constitution.

    Hm. **Consults Pocket Constitution**

    Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech…

    Wrong. Additionally, there is no such thing as “hate-speech” or ” free speech”. There is just the “freedom of speech” and you either have it, or you do not.

  39. The author must live in fantasy-land, if the thinks that “taxpayers are asked to fund the police.”

    Try saying no, go to jail.

    PG

    1. They can say no at the ballot box.

  40. I’ve read that the thug actually was a leftist anyway. He probably is happy the Fascist Party mayor wants to use his actions as an excuse to shut down free speech even further in radical-left Portland. As it is, those free-speech people had better be ready to protect themselves from the inevitable leftist mob, because the mayor certainly won’t let the police do it.

  41. Portland killer ranted against Jews, Christians, and Muslims, media reported him as “Islamophobe”
    But that didn’t stop the enemedia from seizing on the bogus islamophobia angle of this story like a dog on a bone. If only they would do that in ascribing the motive of Islam to the now tens of thousands of jihad attacks, we wouldn’t be losing the war.
    By Robert Spencer, May 29, 2017:
    The establishment media has seized upon Jeremy Joseph Christian, especially given his surname, as an example of their false claim that every religion has “extremists,” and Islam isn’t singular in this. In reality, this is one part of Jeremy Joseph Christian’s rant: “You don’t like it? You got a problem with what I’m saying? F*** all you Christians and Muslims and f****** Jews , f****** die. Burn you at the stake? f****** die.”
    But when there are no actual instances of “Islamophobia,” as we have seen so many times before, they have to be invented to buttress the Left’s failing narrative that Muslims are frequently targeted and victimized in the U.S.
    http://pamelageller.com/2017/0…..hobe.html/

    1. Jeremy Joseph Christian’s rant: “You don’t like it? You got a problem with what I’m saying? F*** all you Christians and Muslims and f****** Jews , f****** die. Burn you at the stake? f****** die.”

      If this is true, and I emphasize if, sounds like he may be an Atheist extremist.

      How ’bout them apples, Progtards?

  42. Doesn’t the major know that if he is allowed to censor what he believes is hate speech, others have the right to censor anything he says?

    He makes one want to bang the forehead against the wall over and over.

  43. How Hate Speech Laws Work In Practice – In their zeal to punish those who spread sexist, racist, transphobic, or otherwise out-of-fashion speech, they seem to forget that history has a bad track record of using censorship to suppress religious, social, sexual, and political minorities.

    1. A Brooklyn teen was arrested in January for a Facebook post featuring emojis of a gun pointed at a cop. One can’t imagine prosecutors showing the same zeal if it wasn’t an authority emoji being “threatened” here. And while the Internet is a hotbed of derogatory comments, unserious threats, and all manner of vitriol each and every day, prosecutors tend to reserve monitoring and investigation for those whose views are unpopular?such as sympathizing with ISIS or denying the Holocaust?and those who criticize judges, police, and others in positions of power.

      1. reason.com

  44. What part of “no law….” does the mayor not understand?

    1. the ‘shall not be infringed’ sounding part – – – –

  45. Just in case you were wondering what sort of background someone as stupid as Ted Wheeler has:

    “He received a bachelor’s degree in Economics from Stanford University in 1985. He also earned an MBA from Columbia University and a masters in public policy from Harvard University.” (from his Wiki page)

  46. The 1st amendment guarantees the right to say even offensive or stupid things. STOP inventing “reasons” to restrict this fundamental freedom because you disagree or feel hurt.

  47. What’s really sad is that most of the politicians who say this are lawyers.

  48. Wasn’t that Hitler’s “reason” for staging the false flag event “Kristalnacht”? When the violence erupted, staged by his own operatives, he instantly (almost “too soon”, it seemed to some) shut down all manner of public liberties to “maintain order” and keep the public “safe”.

    This is the same mayor that told his coppers to stand down when serious rioting and destruction raged for days in downtown Portland… will anyone else join me in saiying, in perfect unison, “DOUBLE STANDARD”?
    But, THIS is the clown Portlanders elected to rule them

    If Portland were not such a liberal city, more would go about the city armed than do now. It used to be illegal to possess firearms on public transit in Portland, and area, but that law got changed about four years ago. Too many muggings just as commuters got off the trains in more outlying areas at night (which comes anytime after 4:30 in winter there). It never would have passed except thousands refused to ride the light rail system BECAUSE of that… traffic dropped radically over a couple months, many taking to driving again (rather be alive to bear the expense and shame of DRIVING again than to be dead and not…..) thus making traffic more of a nightmare than it normally is.

    Too bad those heroes on the train were not armed, and thus able to defend these women with a slightly more convincing tool. Then this nutjob mayor would be all knickerbeknotted over a dead terrorist in HIS city.

    1. Jeezus you gun-totin’ Nut-Cons are something else.
      It’s like you pulled that paranoid shit from Guns N’ Sheep-Fuckers Monthly.

  49. Amazing how many politicians don’t know about existing laws and have no desire to enforce them. I’m sure it is against the law in Portland to incite a riot. If he is so afraid of the “alt-right” he can always fall back on that and have them arrested if they become violent. Unfortunately that might mean his police force would have to arrest plenty of “triggered” liberals too.

  50. Constitutional principles are just so inconvenient to F”lam”ing Fascists.

  51. It seems obvious. If hate speech was actually prohibited in any way, most of main stream media would not have been allowed to publish anything since Trump was elected.

  52. Does anyone understand that verbal venting, no matter how objectionable, is better than pent up rage. I don’t see where the Mayor has wanted to curtail the inflammatory speech of the leftist radicals. In the same situation I would have probably been one of the men stabbed to death, but even my death isn’t worth ending one of this nations most basic liberties.

  53. “The mayor of Portland, Oregon, has strong words for those who would sow fear in his city and attempt to shut down citizens’ rights to free expression: “I surrender.”

    LOL. As if.

    A more apt paraphrase of the Mayor would be “If I don’t like what you want to say I’m going to seek to shut you up.”

    Hardly what anyone else would call a ‘surrender’ so stop trying to soft pedal it as such. The Mayor hasn’t thrown up his hands, he’s come out swinging against free speech.

  54. Even truly offensive groups have the right to free speech, and they’re not “inciting violence” if their political opponents attempt to use violence to silence them.

  55. there is a “fighting words” exception to the first amendment…it’s not called “hate speech”.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.