The Right is Right


The Liberal Bill of Rights

by Wesley Thoene
May 2003
The Liberal Bill of Rights
Liberals crack me up. Really, they do. By now, we are all accustomed to their complaining about how they are being silenced and denied their First Amendment rights by the Bush administration. I can't even pick up a newspaper without seeing someone refer to Bush as a "dictator"- an accusation followed by "proof" people are being mistreated for speaking out against President Bush. This is simply amazing to me- and it's another example of liberals picking and choosing their Bill of Rights.

Recently, the following quote came from activist/actor Tim Robbins: "Susan and I have been listed as traitors, as supporters of Saddam, and various other epithets by the Aussie gossip rags masquerading as newspapers, and by their fair and balanced electronic media cousins, 19th Century Fox."

As we see, Robbins is complaining about how the media and others treat him because of his pro-Saddam stance. Obviously, Robbins has the right to say whatever he wants- that is his right as an American, no matter how uninformed he may be. However, Mr. Robbins and liberals like him and the Dixie Chicks, do not realize that it is OUR right as Americans to counter their views. It is our right to not buy their CDs. It is our right to not see their movies. Their reaction is a typical liberal response. They lash out, claiming their First Amendment rights were violated. It's called acountability, folks- I know they don't have it in Hollywood, but welcome to the real world. We have as many rights as you do, and if we don't feel like supporting your careers after you decide to push your views on us and undermine our troops, that is our choice and constitutional right. It's not the president or government who is striking back against you- it's the average American citizen.

Why are people lashing out at these celebrities? Well, it's the hypocrisy of the whole situation. Does President Bush show up at movie shoots and tell Sarandon, Robbins, etc. how to act? No, I don't think he does. You were good in The Shawshank Redemption, Mr. Robbins, but you have no idea what kind of secret-level information Mr. Bush has seen in regards to Iraq, terrorism, and chemicals. And I guarantee if a chemical attack did take place, you and the same people criticizing this war would be the first to criticize President Bush for "allowing" an attack to happen.

And there's more to it than that- even the sight of jubilant Iraqis rejoicing while tearing down Saddam's statue did not change the mind of these "concerned", self-proclaimed "humanitarians." They claim to be protecting human lives, yet they are against a war which would usurp a man who has killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqi and Kuwaiti civilians. That makes you wonder what their true motives are.

On a side note, it's funny that liberals are constantly waving their First Amendment rights to everyone considering how much many of them hate the Second Amendment. I'm no actor, so I don't know if movie stars don't study the Bill of Rights beyond the first one. Many of the people complaining about their rights- specifically one of the least-educated spinmasters in America, Michael Moore- are the ones who take a firm stance in denying people the right to carry a gun (as allowed in the Second Amendment). Bowling for Columbine was full of outright lies and half-truths- yet the message was clear: all people who carry guns are dangerous and the right to bear arms has created a dangerous environment in America. Mr. Moore, I encourage you to give college another try (since you dropped out the first time) and attempt to read farther down the same Bill of Rights you seem to love so much. Afterall, you were certainly allowed to use the First Amendment to push this point-of-view: even though it was only used to blast the Second Amendment.

Now, I'd like to exercise MY right of free speech in response to your earlier comments, Mr. Robbins. You and Susan Sarandon ARE traitors. I believe we are all in agreement that the definition of traitor is one who commits treason. Treason, as defined by the Constitution, consists of "levying War against them [the United States], or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort." You and your live-in girlfriend have done just that.
As far as I am concerned, you, the Dixie Chicks, and Michael Moore are traitors. It is one thing to attack President Bush (even though I don't believe THAT should be done in wartime); but it is quite another to offer "comfort" to the enemy and endanger the lives of men and women who are far superior in character and patriotism than you could ever hope to be. That's my opinion, and I, unlike you, will stand by it without groveling about how people may respond to it. Why? Because I, unlike you, understand the Bill of Rights.


April's column- "The Moral Justification of a War against Iraq"
March's column- "The Liberals and the Little Guy" 1