Noam Chomsky correctly put it (paraphrasing): You are either for free speech or you are against it. There is no meaningful middle ground. Everyone is for free speech that they agree with. Even Nazi propaganda minister Joseph Goebbels agreed with that. The meaningful test is whether you are for speech that you disagree with. Blogger Brian Stokes wants to remove racist blogs. Therefore he is against free speech that he disagrees with; he is against free speech.

Should Google honor his wishes? Clearly they have a right and a reason not to. If you claim to be for free speech you must support their freedom to keep the blogs.

There is a simple rationale why the basic right of free speech has a public benefit in this case ... giving the bloggers enough rope to hang themselves. If their opinions are so poisonous, they should be publicly aired so that everyone can see for themselves how pathetic and disgusting they truly are.