GUEST OPINION: Free speech threatened by those who shut down opposition

Published: Saturday, November 26, 2011

By Jim Runestad

We live in a world of turmoil unprecedented in many of our lifetimes. This uncertainty stirs emotions and often a tendency to dehumanize opponents and label them with the worst of motives.

In politics, the surest way to avoid this political dissension is to shrink from taking a firm stand on contentious issues. Instead, take the path of least resistance. It is usually safe to talk frankly to a room full of supporters, but best to avoid appearing any place where one’s views might encounter a hostile reception. This strategy is widely employed in politics today.

Further, a politician’s views are seldom vetted for truthfulness but rather how well they can be packaged and sold to the public. And frequently, the demonization of one’s political opponent has replaced meaningful debate.

Since I was elected in 2008, I have experienced firsthand outrageous personal attacks designed to dissuade me from fighting for issues I think are important. This first occurred when I shepherded through a resolution to require Oakland County contractors to utilize the E-Verify system to make sure that their employees are legally authorized to work — something that is required of federal contractors.

[b]A local community activist traveled around town trying to convince various public organizations that my resolution would “require the installation of radio chips in all immigrants.â€