If the Washington Post’s leadership were smart, they’d shut down production until they can figure out what the hell is going on.

Clearly, they are not, in fact, smart. Because they decided that it would be a great idea to publish this garbage piece by former TIME editor and Obama State Department official Richard Stengel

Stengel’s piece concludes:

Let the debate begin. Hate speech has a less violent, but nearly as damaging, impact in another way: It diminishes tolerance. It enables discrimination. Isn’t that, by definition, speech that undermines the values that the First Amendment was designed to protect: fairness, due process, equality before the law? Why shouldn’t the states experiment with their own version of hate speech statutes to penalize speech that deliberately insults people based on religion, race, ethnicity and sexual orientation?

All speech is not equal. And where truth cannot drive out lies, we must add new guardrails. I’m all for protecting “thought that we hate,” but not speech that incites hate. It undermines the very values of a fair marketplace of ideas that the First Amendment is designed to protect.

Using the “free press” to argue for censorship is certainly a bold strategy. Let’s see how it’s playing out for him:

Evidently.

Good question. We’re extremely offended by Richard Stengel’s mind-numbingly ignorant take.

That’s being very generous. The only clear takeaway from this mess is that Stengel has no idea what the hell he’s talking about.

Poor Richard’s apparently unfamiliar with the expression “be careful what you wish for.” And also with the actual meaning of freedom of speech.

We’re drawing a blank, honestly.

***

Update: