Here we see CNN contributor and Andrew Breitbart editor Dana Loesch defending recently-fired MSNBC contributor Pat Buchanan, saying that Buchanan’s First Amendment rights have been violated by a “progressive” conspiracy to silence “diversity of thought:” Controversial Pat Buchanan Forced Off of MSNBC by Van Jones, Media Matters - Big Journalism.

“Diversity of thought” is a rather ironic phrase to apply to Pat Buchanan, a man who is viciously opposed to diversity in any other form. And “controversial” is an oddly watered down word to apply to someone who has a history of associating with open white supremacists. But on with Loesch’s apology for Pat:

Regardless what you think of Pat Buchanan’s controversial and questionable views, it’s troublesome when the First Amendment is abridged by small, partisan groups who’ve made it their mission to streamline diversity of thought to less voices, not more. Buchanan announced last night that he was forced off air by Van Jones’s Color of Change and the under-fire Media Matters …

That’s the difference between conservatives and progressives: conservatives want the diversity of voices, even if they disagree with the thought or if the thought is offensively over-the-top sensational. They’re eager to debate it out in the open and prove it wrong. They desire nothing more than to win converts by proving how illogical or immoral the opposite viewpoint is while using logic and reason. Progressives, on the other hand, desire none of those things, regardless whether or not the opposing viewpoint is sensational or simply one with which they disagree. Their idea of debate is quasi-censorship: blacklisting diversity from the airwaves. They’re either too lazy or too incompetent to debate the issues, so they resort to hiding them altogether. They don’t engage, they persecute and suppress. It’s weak and unAmerican.

I may whole-heartedly disagree with your sentiment, but I’m not going to call for your removal from the airwaves. I’ll debate you in the public square but I won’t press for your firing as my belief in your free speech doesn’t hinge upon whether or not you believe in mine; and my belief in the right of a private company to set standards as it pleases — except when those decisions come by way of outside pressure from fascist squeaky wheels who demand that their influence on an entity exceed their actual relevance in reality.

Of course, when Dana Loesch says “I’ll debate you in the public square,” she actually means she’ll call you a “pervert” and a child molester.

But it’s really awful that poor Paleo Pat’s constitutionally guaranteed free speech has been unceremoniously stripped away by the evil liberal cabal, isn’t it?

For more on this abominable censorship, read Pat Buchanan’s latest column at Townhall.com, RealClearPolitics.com, HumanEvents.com, World Net Daily, Creators Syndicate, and practically every other right wing site on the Internet.

Meanwhile, in objective reality, Pat Buchanan’s First Amendment rights have not been “abridged,” because the First Amendment pledges that the government will not make laws censoring speech, and Buchanan’s firing by MSNBC has nothing to do with the government. As you can see, he is still perfectly free to promulgate his hateful ideology at any website and/or cable news channel that will allow it. (Hey, Fox News — opportunity’s knocking.)

Dana Loesch clearly doesn’t understand the First Amendment to the US Constitution.

The First Amendment guarantees the right of free speech, without government censorship. It does not guarantee racist dirtbags like Pat Buchanan a “right” to be employed by MSNBC or any other private company that chooses not to help him spread hatred.