In this era of widespread complaints of hate speech, I can’t help but wonder how it works.
Is it hate speech to accuse strangers of the following, and is it necessary to have any supporting facts?
Deplorable and/or irredeemable. Ignorant. Domestic terrorist. Racist, white supremacist, or bigot. Homophobe, or whatchacallit-phobe that covers either fear of someone attracted to farm animals, ladies shoes or Al Gore.
Is faking an attack by any of the above evil-doers considered hate speech? Is it hate speech to publicly endorse said faked attack without knowing any facts?
How about complaints that our immigration policies are upside-down, or that we’re being lied to about inflation, climate change, or Wuhan Flu?
Is it hate speech to say that Ukraine is none of our business, and that we’d probably be upset if Russia was messing around in our neighborhood? Are we the only country allowed to claim a Monroe Doctrine?
OK, maybe calling Biden a senile party hack is pushing the envelope, even if it’s true. Same with describing our health system as Dr. Fauci’s Travelling Medicine Show. And it’s probably not nice to inform the world that our vice president’s only redeeming qualities are her gender, DNA, and a charming cackle used to cover the ability to carry on an intelligent conversation.
Maybe it’s pushing it to say Hillary has always been an evil and conniving, until after she’s been tried and convicted.
Maybe our legislators will pass a non-partisan hate speech law. Or not.
— Jack McWherter, Cherokee