Re: WSJ on "IRS-bashing"

At 3:36 PM 5/29/96, geeman@best.com wrote:
>According to WSJ, Leslie B. Samuels, "Treasury's top tax-policy official"
>says that "IRS-bashing is 'counterproductive and harmful'" -- and that
>"destructive rhetoric ... hurts the tax system and society" [elisions are
>the WSJ's]
>
>What if a the CDA grew little by little by little until it covered
>statements deemed "destructive rhetoric" .... hmmm. I mean after all, if
>it harms society....!

If the CDA is upheld by the Supreme Court, which would surprise me, then
"free speech" as we know it is gone completely.

By the way, it's _already_ the case that "hurtful speech" can be prosecuted
as a civil rights violation of a class of persons. If I refer to women as
"bitches and hoes" ("hoe" = "whore," in certain American dialects) I am, as
I understand things, technically in violation of various laws which outlaw
the repression, subjugation, marginalization, and encheferation of women
and other colored people.

(Oh, I can say these things in the privacy of my home without fear of
reprisal by the State, or even in small groups. But if I say this in
public, or in a company, or in many other fora, look out!)

Liberty has been given away for several decades in this country.

--Tim May

Boycott "Big Brother Inside" software!
We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, we know that that ain't allowed.
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
Timothy C. May              | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,
tcmay@got.net  408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA  | knowledge, reputations, information markets,
Licensed Ontologist         | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

On Wed, 29 May 1996, Timothy C. May wrote:

> If the CDA is upheld by the Supreme Court, which would surprise me, then
> "free speech" as we know it is gone completely.

I agree. I don't think it will surprise me, though, because it just ain't
gonna happen. :-)

> By the way, it's _already_ the case that "hurtful speech" can be prosecuted
> as a civil rights violation of a class of persons. If I refer to women as
> "bitches and hoes" ("hoe" = "whore," in certain American dialects) I am, as
> I understand things, technically in violation of various laws which outlaw
> the repression, subjugation, marginalization, and encheferation of women
> and other colored people.

Fascinating. Could you provide citations to these laws so that people in
this plane of reality might take a look at them? Over here, any such law
would be invalidated by R.A.V. v. St. Paul. The only exceptions are
restrictions on "fighting words" that meet the tests in Chaplinsky v. New
Hampshire and "hostile working environment" discrimination, which I assume
is what you're talking about, in some elliptical way.

-rich
 In February, John Howard opened a Ku Klux Klan museum and apparel store,
 called The Redneck Shop, in Laurens, S. Car.  Asked by a reporter what
 the reaction was by townspeople, Howard said, "The only people I've had a
 problem with, who took it as an insult and a racial situation, have been
 blacks.  I didn't know blacks here were so prejudiced."  [Louisville
 Courier-Journal-AP, 3-7-96]