You better say POTATO and not PATATO. And remeber we're wathcing.

     Once again the American people are faced with the task of protecting one of our fundamental rights. Now, we are used to this, and every once in a while someone (a politician, celebrity or commentator) makes an outrageous or quasi-outrageous statement that forces common sense Americans to take a step back and reflect on what our fundamental freedoms and rights are.  The typical outcome of these moments is a newly renewed fervor for the practice and appreciation of our unique American freedoms.  The difference this time is not that one of our rights is being outright challenged, but rather monitored and policed, censored in a way.  Today our most celebrated and fundamental right, the right to free speech, is under such an attack.  This is no more evident than in the events of the past week. 
     First let us look at what occurred on the daytime television show The View. Last Thursday, cable news pundit Bill O'Reilly was the guest and the discussion centered on the prudence of politicians' reactions to the building of a mosque at Ground Zero. All Hell broke loose when O'Reilly exclaimed that Americans were very uncomfortable with the mosque's location because "Muslims killed us on 9/11".  At this point, two of the show's hosts (Joy Bahar and Whoopi Goldberg) screamed at him and then walked off the set (of their own show) in apparent disgust.  The most important part of this occurrence was what co-host Barbara Walters said after they walked off the set.  She asked that the crowd settle down and asked that all listen to her for a minute.  She then told everyone that they just witnessed what SHOULD NOT happen.  She said that we as Americans SHOULD be able to sit down and have an intelligent debate without yelling, washing our hands of each other and walking off sets.  She is very right!  Unfortunately, in today's politically correct society, it is safer to yell and leave rather than to engage in intellectual banter which MAY just actually yield some results.  I notice how often people are content to yell and mock and then withdraw.  Later they badmouth their opponents at another venue where the opponent cannot counter or retort, how convenient and cowardly. 
     O'Reilly would soon apologize for the generalization of all Muslims and said that he should have specified "Muslim Extremists".  All hosts (including the now rejoined Goldberg and Bahar) concurred.  The question is, what was actually wrong with what he had said initially?  Any common sense person knows that not all Muslims attacked us.  They also know that it wasn't Buddhists, Taoists, Christians or Martians that attacked us.  At the end of the day, O'Reilly stated a fact.  The people who attacked us on 9/11 were indeed Muslims, period. Fanatical and extremist as they were, they were still Muslim.  But because O'Reilly did not include the word "extremists" he was treated as if he just told a fabricated story and was being bigoted and hateful.  When did stating a fact become such a dangerous endeavor.  He should of said POTATO!
     The second example of this unique form of censorship is the case involving the firing of journalist Juan Williams by National Public Radio (NPR).  Ironic as it is, this case centers around comments Mr. Williams made on Bill O'Reilly's show on Monday night.  (Damn you Mr. O.)  Juan Williams, a noted LIBERAL journalist and commentator, made the statement that in this post 9/11 world even he was uncomfortable when someone boarded a plane dressed in traditional Muslim garb.  He said this in the context that those feelings were wrong and were a product of the fears of our time.  Well, the uber-liberal NPR (which has employed Mr. Williams as a radio host for the past 10 years) fired Mr. Williams for that statement.  Funny, I thought that the term liberal was synonymous with open-minded, I guess that open-mindedness only applies when you are saying exactly what they want you to say and in exactly the manner in which they want you to say it.  Other NPR radio hosts have made significantly more egregious comments in the past; including wishing AIDS on Jessie Helms and his family.  (The gal that said that is still employed by NPR.)  The crazy thing is that NPR, and the groups that support NPR, are not even putting his comments into the context in which he said them.  He simply did not say EXACTLY the right thing, and that was just unacceptable to NPR and their agenda.  Now there may be other factors involved and maybe those will come to light.  But as of right now NPR is guilty of censoring speech that they did not agree with. 
     Political Correctness is running rampant and is now putting a stranglehold on our ability to speak and debate intelligently without fear of reprimand or being wrongly raked over the coals. In today's age, every word we say can and will be dissected and critiqued to the point where people will no longer speak about tough or controversial subjects.  Our public dialogue will be limited to the weather (as long as we are not discussing global warming). We must remember that the right of free speech as guaranteed by the 1st Amendment is designed to protect speech that is not popular.  I know that is a hard pill to swallow sometimes, but the examples above should be easily digested.