Ninth Amendment trumps the First, Ed

The Post's reliably quirky Ed Quillen jumps Wardo:

It would be easier to support Churchill's claim that his First Amendment rights are being circuitously violated if there were any evidence that he actually believed in the First Amendment.

Most of us, after all, figure the First Amendment applies to everybody, even people we disagree with. But Churchill has been arrested on several occasions for attempting to violate other people's rights to free expression - specifically, the marchers in Denver's annual Columbus Day Parade.

In Ward's world, the parade is "hate speech" and not entitled to First Amendment protection. Now others have made decisions that likely stemmed from his expressions, which some found rather hateful. Perhaps some chickens have come home to roost.

Update: Not that Quillen totally understands:

[C]hurchill was denounced by every right-thinking opportunist in American public life. That outrage was rather selective, though. In essence, Churchill argued that the United States had allowed certain evils, and had thus got what was coming to it. That is also what the Revs. Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson claimed at the same time: America tolerated evil and justly suffered retribution.

Pat 'n' Jerry, of course, aren't paid by the taxpayers to teach our yoof. Also, they got giant rashers of shit for their idiotic comments.

Update II: Quillen is another of those columnists who thinks Ward's already been fired.