Quotes About Public discourse

For the sake of public discourse, for the demands of the free market, and for the value we place in citizen advocacy, Rush Limbaugh must go.

There's no question that a public official of either party can take it too far, and it's up to the candidate to be able to strike that balance, the balance that is the separation of church and state. The way I've always looked at this is that every candidate has a right to talk as much or as little about their faith as they deem appropriate.

I don't feel that I'm particularly political. I'm interested in politics; I'll express my view if I feel strongly about something, but humanitarian issues, I think, are slightly different.

There are issues in this country that a lot of people feel strongly about.

There are three major social issues that this country is struggling with: education, poverty, and drugs. Two of them we talk about, and one of them we don't.

India is the world's largest democracy and everyone should have a right to voice their opinions.

What I do is good for Russian opposition. What I do is I speak freely on the things and items that were never discussed loudly with Russian public for years.

We need to address issues our people think about and talk about. Because there is a feeling that Europe elites are addressing different issues. Not the ones that people care about.

Public discourse requires making an argument for a point of view, not having an argument - as in having a fight.

Discussions of Western civilization are too often confined to works of high art that reflect a relatively narrow element of public taste and experience.

On television, journalists now routinely appear on talk-shows-with-an-attitude where they are encouraged to say what they think about something they may not have finished thinking about.

Everyone is in favor of free speech. Hardly a day passes without its being extolled, but some people's idea of it is that they are free to say what they like, but if anyone else says anything back, that is an outrage.

Democracy means government by discussion, but it is only effective if you can stop people talking.

Everybody favors free speech in the slack moments when no axes are being ground.

Freedom means the right of people to assemble, organize, and debate openly.

The real issue, in a democracy, is whether the citizens had such an opportunity. They did not. Until deregulation, and the explosion of free speech thanks to courageous talk-show hosts such as myself, "the Godzilla of Talk Radio," nobody even knew about it.

Israel is stupid for allowing people to vent their anti-Semitism.

The wrong Democratic reaction to a stupid Republican utterance is to play hurt.

I feel like the menswear blogger is a special breed, and by that, I mean they really have brought menswear out of the closet and into the public discourse where guys are not afraid to talk about style, dressing, clothes.

I think it is very difficult today to have a reasoned public discourse on any controversial subject. Certainly, election years present a complicating factor.

Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots

To talk in public, to think in solitude, to read and to hear, to inquire and answer inquiries, is the business of the scholar

Yet citizens did not speak up because they had always divided themselves up between those (others) who read Vorwärts and those (of us) who did not. You can only preserve the civic order if you step in for your opponent and speak out against your ally.

Trump broke free of this constraint, and it is safe to say that political correctness will never have the stranglehold on public discourse that it once did.