The problem here is not that the Secret Service investigated someone who at least superficially appeared to be calling for violence against the President. (Because let’s be honest, if the sticker-maker didn’t want that interpretation to occur to at least some readers he wouldn’t have done it that way.) That is what the Secret Service is supposed to do. The problem is that they’re now straining at gnats while they swallowed camels under the Bush presidency.

To avoid typing terms that might get Cassy’s blog looked at by some NSA snooper (yeah, it’s fun being paranoid), just consider what would have happened if someone had tried to produce an analogue of this film — http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0853096/ — today, about the current President. If anybody connected to that film escaped Secret Service scrutiny, I would be very surprised. But that in itself would be understandable. To freak out over bumper stickers for one President and let feature films go by without comment for another, that’s the hypocrisy.

Second, wasn’t the Unabomber hero to the radical green movement or something? How would anyone associate the Unabomber with the right? *Shrugs* But then again, I wonder how anyone calls Hitler a extreame right wing loony.

Obama and his people can’t be quite so blithe about the anger coming from the right. You see, you guys’ve got the guns. And you know how to use them.

(Or so they would see it. Because of course every rightist/conservative citizen who expresses vehement disagreement with the president is only a beer or two away from becoming the Unabomber – right?)

This is a profoundly important observation on your part, Cassy. Many countries (including the UK, I believe) have anti-”hate speech” laws that, in effect, destroy any pretense of free speech. Why? Because the government (or judges) can decide what is ‘hateful’ speech and what is not. If I said, “I hate Barack Obama,” am I guilty of a crime? Since he is a black man I could be accused of making a racist statement. Even the *chance* that I might be accused of a crime could make me hesitant to speak my mind. That is NOT free speech. Free speech is the right to speak my beliefs FREELY without fear of prosecution.

As Americans, we all have the right to hate people, places, things and (yes) even religions or races. The KKK and neo-Nazis (as despicable as they are) have every right to hate blacks and other minorities or religions and to say so publicly.

Now, this isn’t to say that there aren’t consequences for our speech. Your employer might very well have the right to fire you for what you say; or you could be sued by someone for slander. But true free speech means that you shouldn’t have to worry about being arrested (or investigated) for saying what you believe. (Unless, as you stated, you threaten some person or some group of people with violence.)

However, there are times when your right to speak can conflict with other people’s rights. For example, in my opinion, the members of the Westboro Baptist Church do not have the right to disturb the peaceful assembly of military funerals. This, as far as I am concerned, is not so much a matter of freedom of speech as it is the right of others to gather in peace. For example, one does not have the right to shout out during a movie or church service any more than you have the right to shout out your political beliefs in the middle of the night in your neighborhood. The right to peacefully assemble to hear others speak (or to sleep!) is not trumped by your right to speak.

Sorry for the super long comment, Cassy. But this is a VERY important topic that you have beautifully addressed! Thanks!