Now, I want to be clear about something. I do not agree with what Charlie said. But my agreement or disagreement is totally irrelevant. As we are a nation that is founded in principles of freedom of speech Charlie has a right to say what is on his mind as a private citizen without fear of retaliation by a corporation.
Hollywood has a long history of assuming they control not only the talent's performance on screen but off as well. But the First Amendment is pointless is corporations can punish you for having an independent thought where government cannot. Shall we defend what Charlie said? Probably not. But we must defend his right to say what he thinks and feels when he is not on the job.
Hollywood has gotten into a bad habit of wrecking the lives of anyone who does not agree with them off screen as well as off, and whether governmental or corporate, it is still suppression of free speech and must be opposed.
I have been where Charlie is now; looking at the end of my career for speaking freely. I oppose the war and I oppose the subversion of the United States to the interests of a foreign power. But the content of my message versus Charlies message is irrelevant.
Either we support freedom of speech in all forms or we do not, and the true test of your commitment to the First Amendment is when you defend the right of someone to speak who you do not agree with.