Anti-Bushies Exploiting Va Tech

[wordsmythe]

Originally Posted by Bubba

What about his First Amendment right to free speech?

His First Amendment rights were not violated. He was arrested nor did this ever go through the courts. Stupid people overreacted and turn it to their own agendas and they were his downfal not the law.

[Bubba]

Originally Posted by flange

Imus still has the right to criticize his government without fear of retaliation from said government. First Amendment? Check.

Imus does not have the right to personally attack another group of individuals, broadcast it to millions, and expect to collect a paycheck for it at the end of the day.

If you think that first amendment rights only apply to what is said against the government, you need to go back and study some history books. Or, if history books are to dull for you...go rent the movie "The People vs. Larry Flynt" he went all the way to the Supreme Court and won over a parody ad that some would say was "hurtful" to Jerry Falwell.

[flange]

Originally Posted by Bubba

If you think that first amendment rights only apply to what is said against the government, you need to go back and study some history books. Or, if history books are to dull for you...go rent the movie "The People vs. Larry Flynt" he went all the way to the Supreme Court and won over a parody ad that some would say was "hurtful" to Jerry Falwell.

Once again, Imus does not have the right to say what he said, broadcast it to millions, (and here's the important part) expect to collect a paycheck for it at the end of the day. If he wants to say "nappy-headed ho's" on his own time, he'd be well within his right to do so.

The First Amendment does not protect your status as an employee of a particular company. The sponsors were jumping ship on Imus, and without advertisers, you don't have a show. CBS wasn't left with much of a choice.

The Supreme Court ruled that Larry Flint's speech was protected, yes. But guaranteed, if the revenue stream for Flint's magazine had been seriously threatened by his attack on Falwell, Flint would not be able to sue his advertisers or his customers on grounds of a First Amendment violation. His advertisers and customers would've been well within their First Amendment rights to tell Flint he could "go to hell".