 |
| Fonda, 1972, posing on an anti-aircraft gun in North Vietnam |
Jane Fonda, along two other has-been lefties, is demanding that the FCC ban Rush Limbaugh from the airwaves for his... insensitivity to women, or whatever.
The irony is delicious. Hanoi Jane is on the outside-- rather than the inside-- of federal prison merely because of the (laudable) American obsession with freedom of speech. In 1972 she committed treason, and in most other societies, including the communist tyranny she bedded, she would have been summarily shot. Instead, Comrade Jane, on returning to our capitalist hellhole, remained free as a butterfly, free to slander the decent forgiving nation of her birth. She starred in a bunch more movies and raked in a ton of cash, and further served the proletariat by marrying the richest guy she could find and making exercise videos.
Hypocrite Fonda pitching totalitarianism is old hat. More disturbing is that the agit-prop 'ban Rush' essay was posted on CNN's website. CNN should have a little bit of squeamishness about spitting on the First Amendment. And other vanguards of the proletariat are joining in. Moth-to-a-
!
Again and again the left censors free speech-- in public schools, in biology classes, about Darwinism, about Global Warming, about politics.
The left is increasingly setting aside respect for our freedoms. They understand that their agenda stands no chance in the free exchange of ideas. They know that they can only win by default-- by silencing others.
The irony is that Jane Fonda herself is a free (and rich) woman only because of America's First Amendment protection for freedom of speech. Next to freedom of religion, it is the most important and sacrosanct right bequeathed by our Constitution. In the totalitarian society she championed, posing on an enemy anti-aircraft gun in a time of war would have been, on her return home, her last public act. Through her totalitarian advocacy, she helped consign millions of innocents in South East Asia to the fate she was spared.
Her demand that Limbaugh be removed from the air by the FCC for his speech drips with irony.
But the Constitution means nothing to the left. It is invoked, and ignored, as suits their ends.
After seeing the various Bill Maher tapes and learning of the contributions he makes to the Democrats, nothing surprises me when it comes to the shameless hypocrisy of the American 'left'.
ReplyDeleteComrade Barbarella on CNN.com? Par for the course, I am afraid. Maybe they think that is 'comedy' too?
PS Mike,
DeleteIf you get a moment, check out my blog on Feser's 'Last Superstition'. A mini-review of an excellent work.
Thanks for turning me on to him.
Cheers!
http://daily-faustian.blogspot.com/2012/03/when-wise-man-points-at-moon-imbecile.html
Rush Limbaugh shouldn't be banned. He's the best thing the liberals have going for them.
ReplyDeleteI've always thought that no one has come out of the Vietnam war with their reputations intact. Not the French, or the Americans, or the South Vietnamese, or the North Vietnamese, or the Australians ...
The only exception I'd make are the allied troops who were sent there, often conscripted, to fight a war which was realized to be unwinnable at the time in the way it was fought, with Westmoreland's tactic of going for kill ratios. And then the returning troops were publicly viified. It still makes me angry.
Was Jane Fonda in North Vietnam when American troops were fighting in South Vietnam? She went there in 1972. I think the Ameican troops had largely been withdrawn by March 1971, with the exception of marines protecting the American embassy in Saigon.
It's difficult to defeat a foe which is ruthless, unheeding of casualties on its own side and had been persistent in its aims for almost 30 years. The fall of South Vietnam had more to do with the resignation of Richard Nixon, so he couldn't fulfill his promise to intervene if necessary, and the 1973 oil shock, making it more expensive for South Vietnam to defend itself, particularly since American aid was declining.
Agreed. Jane Fonda did make a lot of foolish statements concerning American POWs and other matters.
But when she went to North Vietnam, the South Vietnamese had largely been abandoned already. It was inevitable that the North Vietnamese were going to win.
Could it have been avoided? I think that the worst decision ever made was allowing the French to return in 1946. The domino theory never was plausible.
"Rush Limbaugh shouldn't be banned. He's the best thing the liberals have going for them."
DeleteIt amuses me that anyone, left or right, takes Rush seriously. He made it clear in numerous interviews when first syndicating his radio show that he was playing a character. Oh, he is a conservative, but for broadcast purposes he turns it up to 11. The Hannities and Becks of the world have probably forced him to now crank it to 12.
I don't worry about what Rush says. What I do worry about is the people that listen and nod their heads without realizing they are listening to a real life Howard Campbell.
-L
Hey - crusade rex changed his avatar...
ReplyDeleteHoly shit people, nobody should be banned from the radio. Freedom of speech, no matter if its left-wing rhetoric or right-wing rhetoric.
Yeah its all sensationalism. I just choose to listen or choose not listen to them. Key word is CHOOSE. Should rush have apologized? Uh, no. The only reason he did was because he lost a few advertisers and his bosses cried about it.
Mulder,
DeleteYeah. I wanted a more serious look.
"I just choose to listen or choose not listen to them. "
Agreed. Change the bloody channel.
Funny, but not surprising, how your Bill Maher loathing becomes apparent just as the right-wing media has trotted out his calling Palin a cunt as a distraction for the Limbaugh controversy.
ReplyDeleteLeaving aside the thousands of other things that Maher and Limbaugh have said that piss either one of us off, and sticking to the allegations of misogyny, I believe that Maher was much less offensive for a number of reasons.
Limbaugh, justified calling Fluke a slut by saying “Fluke say’s she is having so much sex…she and her friends are having so much sex…she’s having sex so frequently she can’t afford all the birch control she needs…” and on and on, tens of times over a period of three days. This is of course a lie. She never testified or made any of these statements that Rush said she did.
Then he says she owes us sex videos on-line. This coming from a guy who was busted bringing a bottle of Viagra that he wasn’t prescribed into the country from the Dominican Republic, well known for its sex resorts. Throw in the 4 childless marriages and it’s easy to connect the dots here to see that Limbaugh is a hard-core misogynistic creep who sees all women as sluts, and whores.
Maher on the other had called Palin a cunt during a stand-up comedy routine, and a dumb twat on his show. Of course these where intended to be, and are, horribly misogynistic insults. Even I like Maher less for having done it. He has gone too far with his political punditry to be granted immunity when he’s doing stand-up.
Having said that, Maher uses cunt and dumb twat for a woman who is in way over her head, who lies at the drop of a hat, who calls her fellow citizens un-American and terrorists, who’s biggest fans are the dumbest Americans, who’s an opportunistic money-grubber, who wore designer cloths, fuck-me pumps, and did an awful lot of cutesy winking while running for VP, and who is one of the most public figures in America. While Limbaugh used slut for a conservatively attired, academically accomplished young woman just starting her career, all based on lies about what she said.
There is no double standard here; Limbaugh was far more egregious.
-KW
@KW:
ReplyDeleteRush was making a point, using (inappropriate) hyperbole and satire. His point was reasonable: Fluke was demanding that people pay for her sex acts. His point is a good one, although he shouldn't have used the invectives he used.
Maher didn't make any point by calling Palin (a grandmother) a c*nt. That's much worse than Limbaugh, who was making an argument. Maher wasn't making an argument. He is just a foul-mouthed jerk.
Michael,
ReplyDeleteNo. Fluke wasn't demanding that people should be paying for her sex acts. She was asking (she doesn't have the power to 'demand') that health benefit insurance provided by employers as part of a remuneration package for employees should treat OCs in much the same way that they treat statins.
If someone is so weak in willpower that he's unable to resist eating too fatty a diet and subsequently requires statins to treat his hypercholesterolaemia, then why shouldn't a woman be covered for OCs in case she occasionally gives into temptation.
I regard the obese to be more morally reprehensible.
KW,
ReplyDeleteYou must have mistaken me for someone else?
I have despised Maher since the late 90's when his sneering, glib, 'punch me' face appeared on Canadian television. I can truly say that I do not know ANYONE personally that actually like the little ponce.
I am sure I have made remarks about him on this very blog.
My sincere dislike for him transcends politics or even his constant barrage of nonsensical comments and truly lame attempts at humour. They is just not funny. He reminds me of one of those nerdy 'class clowns' in Jr high who's 'humour' is at every one else's expense and who latches on to some football player or some such in order to save him from regular ass-kickings.
Never liked him. Not from day one. His stupid program is/was THE most PC show on TV.
I dislike him personally. The political crap he spews simply justifies my feelings for him.
There are people on the 'right' who irritate me almost as much (ie Coulter), but they occasionally make a salient point. Maher is one of those people who test my tolerance on a 'gut' or instinctive level. The best I could hope to do is NOT kick his ass, should I ever meet him. The urge to push his sneering nose in would be overwhelming. I would, however, remove myself to avoid a prison sentence.
The guy just makes my skin crawl.
PS. I don't like him.
BTW calling a woman a 'c--t' and referring to her 'disgusting c--t' is NOT the same as calling some guy an asshole, jerk or whatever. Not in any part of the world I am familiar with, anyway.
Ask ANY woman. Better yet try it on for size with a woman you know. But get ready to duck.
The use of the word alone is akin to 'whore' or 'slut' but even MORE crude, and utterly inappropriate.
Just so we all remember who actively defends our rights, I'll re-post this list in a modest attempt to balance the froth of this blog with the occasional fact or two.
ReplyDeleteThe ACLU of Texas (2011) opposed a public high school’s policy prohibiting students from wearing visible rosaries and crosses in the Brownsville Independent School District. http://www.aclutx.org/2011/11/18/aclu-of-texas-demands-brownsville-isd-disclose-policies-banning-rosaries-and-crosses-at-school/
The ACLU of Nebraska (2011) opposed a policy at Fremont Public School that would prevent students from wearing Catholic rosaries to school.
http://www.aclunebraska.org/index.php/religious-liberty/127-that-gang-of-nuns-looks-pretty-dangerous
The ACLU of Virginia (2011) defended the free religious expression of a group of Christian athletes in Floyd County High School who had copies of the Ten Commandments removed from their personal lockers.
http://www2.wsls.com/news/2011/feb/25/aclu-virginia-defends-floyd-co-high-school-christi-ar-867856/
The ACLU of Connecticut (2011) filed a lawsuit on behalf of a Naval officer who sought recognition as a conscientious objector because of his Christian convictions against war. After a period of intense religious study, reflection, and prayer, he had come to realize that his religious beliefs were in conflict with his military service. The officer's request was subsequently granted and he received an honorable discharge.
http://www.acluct.org/legal/religiousliberty/navalofficerwinscodischarg.htm
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/23/nyregion/23objector.html?_r=1&scp=2&sq=ACLU&st=cse
The ACLU of Colorado (2010) supported the rights of students in Colorado Springs School District 11 to wear crosses, rosaries, and other religious symbols. A middle school had announced a policy forbidding students from wearing certain Christian symbols unless they were worn underneath their clothing.
http://aclu-co.org/news/aclu-supports-students-right-of-religious-freedom
The ACLU of Florida (2010) filed a lawsuit on behalf of a local homeless ministry, the First Vagabonds Church of God, challenging an Orlando ordinance that prohibits service of food to groups in the same public park more than twice per year. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit eventually enjoined the city from enforcing the ordinance, allowing the church to resume providing food to the homeless.
http://www.aclufl.org/news_events/?action=viewRelease&emailAlertID=3668
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/breakingnews/os-homeless-feeding-ruling-20100831,0,6714611.story
The ACLU and the ACLU of Texas (2010) filed a brief in the U.S. Supreme Court in support of a Texas state prisoner seeking damages after prison officials denied him the opportunity to participate in Christian worship services.
http://www.aclu.org/prisoners-rights-religion-belief/christian-prisoner-entitled-seek-monetary-damages-violation-his-rel
.... There are scores more examples for anyone who looks.
------
No, Rush shouldn't be pulled from the air by anything other than bad ratings.
The fact that he enjoys good ratings while spouting his messages of hate demonstrates the moral bankruptcy of his largely conservative listener base. But he has a constitutional right to his radio show.
But let's be quite clear - while conservatives advocate for their free speech rights to, for example, teach divine magic in school science classes, it is "liberal" organizations like the ACLU that fight for EVERYBODY'S right to free speech.
@RickK:
DeleteThe exceptions prove the rule. The ACLU has a massive history of hostility to civic expression of religion. The irony (lost on you) is that these sporadic defenses of religious freedom by the ACLU are made necessary by judicial precedents violating religious freedom that were caused by... ACLU.
The ACLU wouldn't have to defend students rights to wear crosses if they hadn't fanatically worked for decades to violate religious rights in schools. Now they have to walk it back, just a bit. Whether that walking back of their own jurisprudence is based on conviction, or on tactical considerations, remains to be seen.
The only principle I've seen with the ACLU is that they hate Christianity.
Michael,
DeleteYour use of 'the exceptions prove the rule' in this case shows how silly your arguments are.
The word 'prove' in this saying has the old meaning of 'test'. It actually means 'the exception tests the rule'. Find an exception and it disproves (in the modern sense) the rule.
Don't confuse Egnor with facts. He is completely immune to anything that violates his Bizarro world. In this respect, he is the perfect ideologue.
ReplyDeleteAnon,
ReplyDeleteAd hominem attacks do not make a case for reasonable disagreement.
You have some sort of counter point? Then by all means make it. Simply attacking the speaker will only reinforce his position.