We make a serious mistake if Breitartists, racists, Nazis, supremacists

[Skidmore]

are permitted to conflate free speech with their acts of intimidation and verbal assault. It is on par with money = speech and Citizen's United. It really also irks me that they are trying to flip language to project their actions and tactics as tools of the left.

[Wellstone ruled]

1. Thanks for this post.

So darn true and we just know,Bannon and friends will abuse the heck out of this.

[oberliner]

2. No, we don't

The free speech rights of those with whom we most virulently disagree are the most critical to protect.

[KT2000]

3. It's like the honor system

run amok. Money as free speech is a ridiculous of course but we do have to protect the verbal and written free speech until it does become assault or harassment.

[Warren DeMontague]

4. The ACLU has made an important, and valid, distinction I think.

Speech is protected- even hateful, bigoted speech. Thats simply a fact.

Direct threats are not protected. However, promoting a threatening, hateful ideology, even one carrying an implied threat, like a nazi flag, is protected speech.

But where the ACLU has drawn the line is crowds rallying with a clearly violent purpose- to wit, if you're bringing clubs and shields it has gone beyond "speech". And if you want someone to fund your legal defense when youre rallying with open carry AR-15s, ask the NRA, not the ACLU.