Scoble - and I have to admit, many other people - are utterly, utterly confused about freedom of speech:
I was going to not blog until Monday, but I saw something today that just has to be blogged about. Seriously, on Monday I’ll be on CNN with Kathy Sierra and Chris Locke talking about this week’s events. I spoke against more rules or other infringments on our freedom of speech. No matter how vile or disgusting that speech is. That said, I reserve my right to take a week off to point out the rotten strawberries sitting on our meme shelf.
There is no requirement to defend vile speech, nor is there a problem with individuals condemning vile speech. The only thing to worry about is when government tries to restrict your speech - and mind you, incitement to violence isn't protected as free speech, either. It's not a restriction on your freedom when your ideas get attacked by other people - and it most certainly is not a restriction on your freedom when you get condemned for out of bounds behavior.
Look at it like this: if the crap aimed at Kathy Sierra had been done in person, would you be defending it? If not, why are you defending the same thing done online behind a mask of anonymity?