Liberals.

 Once upon a time...

Aryeh Neier was the Jewish national executive director of the ACLU and is a Holocaust survivor. He was co-founder of Human Rights Watch. He was the first president of the Open Society Institute.

Even though I'm mostly a conservative -I've got several "classical" liberal views- he's sort of a hero to me.

I'm a huge fan of the Constitution and it's amendments; right up on top is the 1st Amendment: the Right to Free Speech.

Aryeh, a personal friend of George Soros back in the day? He also is a big fan of the 1st Amendment.

In 1977 Aryeh defended the First Amendment rights of Neo-Nazis to march in Skokie, Illinois, a town with a high population of Holocaust survivors. Neier argued that defending free speech, even for hateful groups, was essential to preventing government censorship.

The ACLU of Illinois, led by Neier's ideological conviction, argued that local ordinances banning the march infringed on the Nazis' rights to free speech and assembly, even though they found the speech reprehensible. The ACLU won the case in federal court, with rulings establishing that the display of symbols like the swastika is protected, symbolic free speech and not just "fighting words".

In present day America unlimited free speech is a Conservative principal. The few remaining classical Liberals still defend unlimited free speech, but your garden variety mainstream liberal? They clamor for the right to "punch a Nazi" (and they get to define what a Nazi is; usually it's anyone who disagrees with them).

Being a Classic Liberal, he's also a huge fan of the 4th Amendment; Neier has strongly criticized government surveillance programs that bypass Fourth Amendment protections, arguing that when surveillance rationale and court opinions are kept secret, it is impossible to determine if constitutional rights are being violated.

Me Too! The government needs to keep it's nose out of my business unless they can PROVE there is a legitimate reason to scrutinize my actions; until then I have a right to say what I want, anonymously (as stated dozens of times by the supreme court over the years, anonymity is a principal component of Free Speech).

the 4th Amendment used to be a cornerstone of Liberal ideology; it's still a classic liberal position, but neither mainstream Liberals or Conservatives seem to care about the 4th; I wish I could say otherwise.

the 2nd Amendment? well, we differ in our opinions. But I would listen carefully and openly to any argument he made on the subject.

what is my point?

Neither the Hardcore Conservatives nor the Hardcore Liberals need to win the next election; I refuse to think I'm completely unique in my thoughts on Free Speech, if nothing else... and with Free Speech, I'm not AS concerned about the other Civil Liberties I'm interested in.

how about a candidate who does not think half of the country are idiots who aren't smart enough to know what is good for them? who mostly agree with the amendments as they are traditionally understood or, at least thinks people who disagree have a right to their opinion? if 40+% of the citizens disagree strongly with what you are doing...move on to something else, a different topic?