"Actually, I count 6- 2 on the 10th, 2 on the 11th, 1 on the 12th, and 1 on the 13th ... "

Okay, six.

"Another 10 or so besides mine that say how bad an idea it is."

And I imagine, without checking back, that at least some of those were posts that were ALSO saying that Imus SHOULD be fired or suffer some kind of consequences.

"But even one call for government control of speech should be commented on."

I agree. And you and several others did. But I felt that you got to blurring the call for action against Imus, on the part of many posters, with the call for government regulation, on the part of two or three posters (in six posts). That's why I made my observation above.

Okay, here's a question - not a rhetorical question, but a philosophical one: can we differentiate between expression of offensive IDEAS (clearly defended by the constitution, and by the quotations in BB's earlier post) and use of offensive LANGUAGE (possibly not protected)?