Several websites have initiated petitions requesting that the NPC cancel Sinclair's appearance, and people from both sides of the issue have inundated the NPC with phone calls and emails. You have to feel badly for the communications people there.
Petitions asking the NPC to cancel the pc is problematic. It only adds to–and validates–Sinclair's supporters' paranoia that Obama’s people will do anything to shut Sinclair up (however, they're quite mistaken in thinking that attacks on Sinclair's character and on his accusations originate with the Obama campaign. As far as I know, and I'm relatively familiar with this whole situation, the anti-Sinclair folks are private citizens offended by Sinclair's smear. Oh, and that "400 paid bloggers thing"? Myth).
Moreover, the petition is questionable because there is that pesky first amendment thing. Although the National Press Club is a private organization, which means that they are not required to accommodate all potential speakers, and they can legally cancel Sinclair's planned press conference, keep in mind that Sinclair has every right to say what he wants. However, this holds true for others: people have every right to challenge, dispute, and disprove his statements.
Another reason why this press conference is important rests on the assertion that "Larry will (i) reveal the corroborating evidence for his allegations regarding Obama [. . . .]" (see press release). This will be fascinating to watch, as Sinclair has continually promised, but never released, such evidence--including the name of a limousine driver who, he claims, he has been in touch with weekly since the incident. Earlier this week, someone contacted Sinclair's attorney, Montgomery Blair Sibley, and discovered that even now, one week prior to the press conference, Sibley is unaware of the limo driver's identity (see here).
Will there be fallout from the press conference? Sure. But one way to view this event is to see it as an opportunity for other people to realize that Sinclair's story doesn't hold up.
For the record, Sinclair is not, nor has he been, denied his freedom of speech. He's maintained a vocal presence on the Internet and some radio programs since his first YouTube video in January. Despite all the bleating about his rights being squashed, there is absolutely no evidence that his first amendment rights have been violated. Seriously--has the man been silenced? Show me how. Show me where. I'll listen.
Aside: Montgomery Blair Sibley has an appeal before the Supreme Court to reinstate his license to practice in DC after being suspended. We should hear more on his status any time now.
No comments:
Post a Comment