I mean this with all sincerity and respect -- at least you admit you don't believe in free speech and you're not a hypocrite, which is more than you can say for

I mean this with all sincerity and respect -- at least you admit you don't believe in free speech and you're not a hypocrite, which is more than you can say for a lot of those in your school of thought. As for me, I think we have enough limits on speech and going further leads to tyranny, that muzzling those you disagree with is abominable and unenlightened. Stalin and Pol Pot would have also eagerly explained why their measures were really for the good of the public, and why new circumstances required it. Your argument boils down to, free speech of my political enemies is only acceptable when it doesn't have influence and reach.