The courts have provided us a long recitation of what 1A means, including that it means having the right -- outside of a very few proscribed instances -- to speak freely. Here's 1A in its entirety (note, as well, that there's no such thing as a "hate speech" exception to 1A):

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

This is from the USCourts.gov website:

"Among other cherished values, the First Amendment protects freedom of speech."

The courts -- in generally recognizing that 1A, and the Constitution itself, in conjunction with the Bill of Rights, was designed to prevent the government removing natural rights, such as the right to speak freely without fear of retribution or physical harm -- have gradually expanded the understanding of the scope and meaning of 1A over the centuries. One saw this in the debate over whether pornography constituted "speech" and whether or not that speech (if it was indeed speech) was in need of protecting, which is what the government is charged with by the Constitution: protecting and guaranteeing our natural rights.

First Amendment absolutists, such as myself, maintain that there's no debate whatsoever. There is an unabridged right to speak freely, with the exception of those very few instances in which speech must be tempered. Civilized people, also such as myself (hah!) only temper their speech out of a sense of respect for others or out of propriety or a desire to be polite and to observe the codes that govern civil conduct between people.

We of course also say that 1A is meant to keep the government from abridging that right, but that in private places such as the LR there is no absolute right to free speech. I do agree with that point, and the relationship between the Godfather and us, here in the LR, is a consensual one. He is free to release our speech-related animal spirits or restrict them as he may, and we are free to either accede to those actions or to leave and find more welcoming and greener pastures.I have no problem with that. Whether I find it "fair" -- and whoever said that life was fair -- is beside the the point.

---

"Politics is just show business for ugly people."

this is so not the case as to be laughable. but i will tell you this. when i get a complaint from someone in this forum about ill treatment against him or her, it's more likely to be from someone with whom you're sympatico. it's typically the most publicly vitriolic who are privately made of glass.

so, when you're going on about the overly sensitive types who run to me to tattle, as infrequent as that is, just remember who it is you're mostly likely to be talking about.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

Obviously someone was offended, and if it wasn't Katy who herself was vexed by Duffy's words and complained to Lieutenant Dan, then the one who did complain is all the more at fault, it seems to me. I mean, not having a dog in that fight, what made that person feel it was incumbent upon himself to then involve himself in affairs that were basically none of his business? Doing so only proves my point about the self-appointed moral decency squad running around the LR.

And I do live in a world where it's okay to utter speech, which in this case was a colloquy of sorts among all of you fine folks participating in that thread. That someone was fine with it right up until he found his little moral code violated, at which point he ran to daddy, so to speak, I find a bit disquieting. Mostly because it makes us seem like delicate little hothouse flowers in danger of fainting from the stress at any second.

Honestly, I don't care whether or not someone appreciates or is offended by another person's speech. Their opinion of that speech carries about a feather's worth of weight in my calculation, to tell the truth. The right to utter that speech carries almost all the weight, in my personal opinion.

Also, I don't care who supports or doesn't support Dan's efforts to prevent something horrendous, speech-wise, from happening here in the LR. However, I do support the Godfather's right to police his PRIVATE land and to lay down the rules as he sees fit. Duffy ran afoul of that and Dan launched him. For being "mean," apparently. But do you see me rushing to organize a boycott or some similar fruitless and utterly masturbatory exercise demonstrating any displeasure I might or might not feel as regards his decision?

---

"Politics is just show business for ugly people."

Another good reason for tempering ones speech and keeping things civil is to encourage a wider variety of viewpoints. It's not because people are easily offended snowflakes, but just don't want to put the effort into defending their character from the ad-hominem attacks. It isn't enjoyable to do so, so those people abstain from discussion. And the forum loses out on potentially valuable contributions.

---

Swimming Workout of the Day:

Favourite Swim Sets:

2020 National Masters Champion - M50-54 - 50m Butterfly

You remind me of one of these guys....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hnLnvU8DjBY

I'm confused. There's not evidence that Katy was offended by Duffy's words . There is evidence that Katy never contacted Dan about the issue (Dan's statement as such). There's a thread where Duffy calls out people who contact those in power to complain and said "unwarranted ugly" things about such an (unnamed, general person). And you've concluded that he was talking specifically about Katy and this was the reason he was banned?

Or is there a thread that has been altered and/or another thread I am missing.

Can you point me to the thread where Duffy specifically called a member of this forum (Katy) ugly and unwarranted things (and the post #). I had some strong opinions earlier in this thread which may change as a result

thanks

the sense I got on Sat was that these things happened as a result of a "body of work" vs. a specific incident/post

I'm a bit depressed that people here actually do come to you to complain about something that's basically speech, but it is what it is, in that regard. And I do thank you for the light moderating hand you exercise. Also, I harbor no illusions about people here in the LR. On that point, I'm reminded of what Mike Tyson once said:

"Everybody has a plan until they get punched in the face."

So yeah; I agree. It's likely that the most publicly vitriolic are the worst offenders of the "Don't run to daddy and snitch rule" once they're figuratively or rhetorically punched in the face.But I can't do anything about that. Other than not run to you if my feelings ever get bruised by mean ol' Ms. Kay.

---

"Politics is just show business for ugly people."

Absolutely correct! Which is why I appreciate that consideration, manners, respect for others' opinions and just common decency in conversation should be the order of the day. I don't have a right to impose that on others, but I try (and don't always succeed, to my shame) to adhere to that as much as possible. Hopefully, the examples that you and others set would convince some of the less-tame "animals" (hahahaha!) here to moderate themselves. Or Dan can hit them over the head with the Banhammer. I have no problem with either tack, and I'm not being intellectually inconsistent in saying that.

You're a good egg, sir. Always have been. And I value your observations and opinions, though in the past I might not have always demonstrated that was so. You goddamn Canuckistani! ;-). ;-)

---

"Politics is just show business for ugly people."

FWIW - here’s my sense of what happened:

There was a thread where Duffy was reacting rather strongly to Katy. A person or persons alerted Dan that the thread seemed to be getting out of hand. Dan privately warned Duffy to cool it and take a break having fielded a complaint(s) requiring time and attention.

Duffy reacted to the warning by starting another thread strongly complaining about people running to Dan.

Dan then issued the ban. I suppose Windy was in the same situation.

Dan chooses not to provide much about such matters but this my opinion of the events.

I loved Robert Loggia, and that whole Tony-Feech thing was classic. That's all I'll say about that. ;-)

---

"Politics is just show business for ugly people."

thanks, I can see how that double down would result in a ban.

As to the thread where you say Duffy was reacting strongly to Katy. Is this the now locked thread that was supposed to be a joke about women. The one that Katy swooped into with potty mouth blazing. Unless there have been alterations to that thread I only see Duffy address Katy directly once (one post) and I see nothing substantial in it.

Yes that’s the thread - he (Duffy) then started another one.

I dunno if dan contacted Duffy privately, but he locked the thread, which seemed to be the catalyst for duffys rant.

---

Swimming Workout of the Day:

Favourite Swim Sets:

2020 National Masters Champion - M50-54 - 50m Butterfly

I don’t know either way but I suspect Dan would likely reach out privately. But I have no more or less info than anyone else.

Makes sense. No secret I liked Duffy, for all that he has Donny Two-Scoops' big, luxurious balls in his mouth ( ;-) ) but I knew he was just begging for a double-tap from Dan by starting up that bitch-and-whine/passive-aggressive thread as he did. Pretty dumb on his part, to speak honestly. Almost like he woke up with an internet death wish that morning and decided to commit Suicide-by-Dan.

I also hope his and Windywave's bans aren't permanent and that they'll be back. I hope YaHey's ban wasn't permanent (and Lord knows he and I had more than a few slap fights). And TheForge's as well. Good guys, all.

---

"Politics is just show business for ugly people."

You seem to think that freedom of speech comes with freedom from the consequences of that speech. Uou put it out there and let the market speak. The forum owner is the market. The market spoke. They were not impressed.

---

I'm beginning to think that we are much more fucked than I thought.

I don't think that in the least, a point I've made several times in this thread as regards Lieutenant Dan's right to do what he did. What I did say is that if I had my druthers speech would be truly free and that, with a very few proscriptions, wouldn't come with repercussions. But we live in the real world. OF COURSE there are going to be consequences, some of which the late, lamented (or not, take your pick) Mr. Duffy experienced for himself.

Like I said: once that woman-joke thread thing was locked he should have cooled it, if only out of consideration for others as well as a bit of judiciousness and prudence.

But Duffy is always gonna Duffy, right? And he went and opened up another thread -- which completed his "body of work" -- and took two in the head for it. All because he let his emotions override his intellect. Classic Duffy. ;-)

---

"Politics is just show business for ugly people."

//also hope his and Windywave's bans aren't permanent and that they'll be back. I hope YaHey's ban wasn't permanent (and Lord knows he and I had more than a few slap fights). And TheForge's as well. Good guys, all. //

I like Duffy and hope he’s back soon, same for Windy. I was disappointed when Forge got banned as well.

BTW, having grown up with 3 sisters and now living with 2 daughters and a wife, I’m certain Katy is perfectly capable of handling matters herself and believe Dan when he states she did not contact him. Shame her name is in the middle of this since she had nothing to do w the ban.

Well, knowing Katy and how tough she is, that's why I asked why she didn't simply tell Duffy to STFU and eat shit and die, as she would normally do. It makes sense that it was someone else who ran to the beat cop, so to speak. And that disturbs me a little, because it smacks of some sort of morality squad thing. Clearly they never grew up in my old Detroit neighborhood. "Snitches get stitches" there. ;-)

---

"Politics is just show business for ugly people."

That has never been how it works and you are probably the first person I have heard to want it like that.

You say it, the market judges. That's how good ideas get sorted from bad.

---

I'm beginning to think that we are much more fucked than I thought.

I didn't always want it that way, but as I became more involved in writing, including during that stint as a political correspondent, I gradually came to that conclusion. But I'm also a realist. And you can't make a very filling lunch on your idealism, can you?

---

"Politics is just show business for ugly people."

Gotta disagree with you on the whole repercussions thing. I want repercussions for my speech, that's one of the ways I know if I'm saying something really stupid. If as a result of my stupid speech I get shut out of the conversation, then I should probably reflect on that as a learning opportunity.

---

Swimming Workout of the Day:

Favourite Swim Sets:

2020 National Masters Champion - M50-54 - 50m Butterfly

I think we probably should distinguish between repercussions and consequences. Perhaps accepting that repercussions should be a natural result of most any speech, for good or ill. Consequences, though, which may appear to be the same as repercussions, are to me more serious and more negative, from a government-censorship POV. I would hope that speech doesn't come with consequences for the utterer, no matter how stupid or foul those utterances are. My libertarian impulses go stronger by the day, it seems. ;-)

---

"Politics is just show business for ugly people."

Luckily for you, your federal constitution guarantees such rights via a vis government curtailment of your speech.

Other countries may not be so lucky.

---

Swimming Workout of the Day:

Favourite Swim Sets:

2020 National Masters Champion - M50-54 - 50m Butterfly

I can't seem to find the post but Duffy (aka Omoplata, Chorizo Blanco, D'sGhost, Iron cross, SS88, Kilgore Trout, Nedrise, King Duffy!, TheReal Duffy, MidwestRoadie, 111333, Not Duffy, Dr. Duffy) once laid it out somewhere that he's just here to stir up shit and push the envelope.

That he did... That he did...

There were some folks in here though that figured out his button and once they pushed that Duffy's reaction is eerily similar to the man whose balls he's now caressing tenderly.