The Guardian goes “full Orwell”

Posted by: Phineas on January 14, 2011 at 6:40 pm

**Posted by Phineas

I realize the UK’s Guardian is pretty far down toward the Left end of the scale, but does Commissar Simon Jenkins realize just how… dumb this headline and summary sounds?

Free speech can’t exist unchained. US politics needs the tonic of order

If America is to speak in a way that heals, as Obama wishes, it needs the curbs and regulations that make freedom of expression real

Didn’t guys named “Benito” and “Adolph” say much the same thing in the last century?

Really, read the whole thing. Not only does this condescending tool push the “evil Right-wing rhetoric drove a deranged man over the edge” meme (A deranged man, who, according to friends, paid no attention to politics and never even watched TV. What did Palin use, Simon? Mind-control rays?), but then he tells this leftist Alice-in-Wonderland version of the opposition to ObamaCare, in which Americans against socialized medicine are ignorant, racist homophobes. Therefore, of course, we need “reasonable regulation” (including the Fairness Doctrine, with terms set by wise men such as Jenkins) of free speech in order to save free speech, because we can’t handle free speech.

And black is white.

And down is up.

And all animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.

Just amazing.

RELATED: Maybe Congressman Jim Clyburn (D-Statist) should get his own column with The Guardian. He’d fit right in.

(Crossposted at Public Secrets)

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Trackbacks

12 Responses to “The Guardian goes “full Orwell””

Comments

  1. Carlos says:

    If we are to get to a point where all the rhetoric is toned down and respectful, we’re somehow going to have to get past the “I won” attitude and vicious verbiage of our glorious leader whenever confronted by opposing arguments.

    ‘Nuff said.

  2. Steve Skubinna says:

    It was a leftist journalist who invented the phrase “We had to destroy the village in order to save it,” which the left used to slander our military for three decades.

    Thing is, they really do think that way.

  3. Sefton says:

    Typical leftist journalist.
    Espouse a totalitarian idealology that needs to be administered on everyone but themselves.
    It never ceases to amaze me how these people don’t even realize the self-destructive nature of their own supposed utopia.

  4. Arnold Siegel says:

    Sounds like Hugo Chavez.

  5. Neo says:

    “As the truth comes out about this nutcase, doesn’t it seem like the media can’t believe that the killer doesn’t care about them? It’s like they think they had an impact on him, when in fact all he cares about is UFOs.”

  6. Steve Skubinna says:

    Idiot Jenkins must have missed the memo. We settled the question of who runs this country two and a quarter centuries ago.

    Hint: it isn’t him.

  7. Lorica says:

    when in fact all he cares about is UFOs.”

    …and pot.

  8. TexasDoc says:

    Leftists never appreciate the deep irony of complaining about the freedom of speech then making a living off of it.

  9. Neo says:

    Canada gets weird again …

    Last week’s ruling by the private radio regulator Canadian Broadcast Standards Council (CBSC) to ban a Dire Straits song is “chilling” and effectively puts rock radio stations on notice, claims a longtime music industry expert.
    Former Billboard Canadian bureau chief and current CelebrityAccess senior editor Larry LeBlanc says the fallout from banning Canadian private radio stations from airing the unedited version of the 1985 hit “Money For Nothing” — specifically for its repeated mention of the word “faggot” in a verse of the song — could resonate with music programmers for some time to come.

    … well this may explain why MTV doesn’t have videos any more.

  10. Old Goat says:

    The thing that has consistently come about is that the leftists tend to complain about free speech when it goes against them, yet hide behind it and whine when their stupid comments end up having consequences.

    They only want free speech when they can say what they want, but hate it when others criticize their views. They hate it when their talk results in people calling them out for it.

    I don’t believe that the left really cares at all about free speech. They only care about their views. Just like the “fairness” doctrine, its about shutting up the opposition rather than putting forth a wider range of views.

    Its why Obama and his administration attacked Fox and talk radio. They are fine with free speech so long as the dialog fits their narrow and wrong headed views.

  11. MissJean says:

    I think it’s just a knee-jerk response from someone with a cultural bias to question a right to free speech. Traditionally the Crown granted publication privileges in the UK and Canada. And modern-day boneheads always seem to put the burden on the individual to prove that he has a reason to express himself, like that Human Rights commissioner who declared that “freedom of speech is an American concept”.

    Look at trial coverage, for example, where there are media blackouts. The American judicial system sequesters juries to ensure no outside media influence. The judge will ban cameras and/or reporters from the courtroom to prevent a media circus, but there isn’t an outright blackout. However, there’s at least one Canadian statute – cited most recently, if I recall correctly, during the “Toronto 18″ trial – that allows even the accused to request a complete media blackout to prevent unfavorable coverage that may prejudice prospective jurors.

    As an aside, I had an old, sharp college professor who had a theory that when media starts to be censored or self-censor important news, it turns to entertainment and gossip pages – because it attracts readers and frankly, doesn’t get nearly the blow-back that investigative journalism does. He pointed to Rupert Murdoch beginning to publish the “Page 3″ topless teens in The Sun as a watershed moment in the decline of serious journalism there and predicted that “info-tainment” (a new concept at the time) would dumb-down US newspapers. Considering that “journalists” like Joy Behar now have their own shows, I can’t help but think he was right.