The limits of restraining orders.
It’s been widely reported this week that Sarah Palin has obtained a restraining order against one Shawn R. Christy of Pennsylvania, who allegedly has stalked and threatened her.
The 20-day order, issued by the Anchorage District Court in Alaska, bars Christy from “contacting, following, approaching, watching or otherwise stalking Palin and her extended family and says he must stay a mile away from her home,” according to The Hill, a Washington newspaper that covers Capitol Hill. The paper reported that a hearing for a long-term order is scheduled for Oct. 13.
If Palin is correct in claiming that Christy stalked and threatened her, then it certainly was appropriate for her to seek, and for the court to issue, a restraining order telling Christy to knock it off.
My question is this. If Palin is entitled to a restraining order against some guy who allegedly threatened her, aren’t Americans who believe the country is threatened by her demagoguery and inflammatory rhetoric entitled to a court order preventing Palin from stalking us?
Of course, such an order would have to be worded somewhat differently than the one she obtained up there in Anchorage, because requiring that Palin stay a mile away from our homes won’t do the trick. Thanks to the fact that Faux News treats her like royalty, Palin can approach the American people with impunity.
On second thought, let Palin spew her spiel. There is no freedom of speech unless all are free to speak. And the best way to fight bad speech is not with censorship, but with more speech.
So bring it on Sarah. While we’re having this little chat, I’ll let you in on a secret. We don't watch Faux News at our house. That means I get all my news about you from what you like to call the LSM, or lamestream media. So at least I’m getting my Palin potage with a dash of context, a pinch of perspective and a sprinkling of balance.