Right to free speech, or right to be disruptive?

Following up on my post here ...

Below is an interesting discussion from "Hardball with Chris Matthews" about free speech in America and the apparent efforts by politicians and candidates to restrict it.

Before you watch the video, let me just say this ... no one should be denied their right to free speech, and any member of Congress or candidate for president who regularly suppresses alternate viewpoints should be called on the carpet publicly.

But there is a big difference between wearing a shirt that says "Bring home the troops" or holding up a sign at a rally, and being vocally disruptive or using profanity.

In that regard, Sally Fields played right into Fox's hands at the Emmy Awards by using a profanity in her anti-war remark. Had she spoken plainly but without offensive language, her message would not have been so easy to delete.

And the young man at the University of Florida? He wasn't Tasered because of his views. He was Tasered because he refused to leave quietly after being asked to by event organizers, and he continued to fight back against the campus police who were escorting him.

Was that an overreaction? Perhaps. But he got what he came to get ...

And now, the "Hardball" discussion.