Palin Defends Duck Dynasty Star

[VictorG]

But in the photo it sure looks like she's talking about something else! Personal minimum requirements perhaps?

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/12/s ... tml?hp=r11" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Skjellyfetti]

Ok.

[andy7171]

I'd still shag her rotten.

[VictorG]

I'd still shag her rotten.

Man somebody sure needs to!!!

[D1B]

Zero's hero strikes again.

Conks

[SuperHornet]

So Bashir is fine, but Robertson is disgusting?

That's a WHOLE lot more than a little inconsistent....

[BlueHen86]

Of course Palin defends him. If they start censoring people for stupidity it's only a matter of time before she is gone.

[UNHWildCats]

Sarah Palin needs to realize that freedom of speech only protects you from being penalized by the government.

[SuperHornet]

Not that I'm a fan of DD (I've never seen it, as I don't have A&E), but the network knew what they were getting when they brought him in. They're just trying to get out of being seen as culpable.

Besides, this is the perfect example of biased network news. Bashir goes off ON THE AIR, and MSM doesn't say a word. Robertson gives an honest answer to a question asked in a magazine, and MSM freaks out....

[Skjellyfetti]

Bashir goes off ON THE AIR, and MSM doesn't say a word.

Good call. Palin called for him to be fired for what he said.

Nice double standard.

[grizzaholic]

Why was AE surprised about a redneck spouting his religious views?

WHO GIVES A SHIT?

[SuperHornet]

People are now questioning whether A&E violated the Civil Rights Act of 1964 in disciplining Robertson. Title VII of the act prohibits employment discrimination with respect to an employee's race, color, national origin, gender, or religion.

I think it's also cogent to note that Robertson wasn't going out of his way to slander anyone. He was asked a question, and he honestly answered it. And for that he's vilified. That's wrong.

[SDHornet]

Uh oh. SH pwnage alert, this time SK is the possible victim. Stay tuned folks...

[kalm]

People are now questioning whether A&E violated the Civil Rights Act of 1964 in disciplining Robertson. Title VII of the act prohibits employment discrimination with respect to an employee's race, color, national origin, gender, or religion.

I think it's also cogent to note that Robertson wasn't going out of his way to slander anyone. He was asked a question, and he honestly answered it. And for that he's vilified. That's wrong.

He had every right to say what he said. He chose his words. His remarks brought negative pub to the company he works for.

If a representative of the CBN or Chick Fillet whatever that stupid company's name is) came out in an interview stating that Christians were a bunch of whining, hypocritical cultists worshipping a made up sky god, you would be the last person defending him or denying their business decision.

[UNHWildCats]

People are now questioning whether A&E violated the Civil Rights Act of 1964 in disciplining Robertson. Title VII of the act prohibits employment discrimination with respect to an employee's race, color, national origin, gender, or religion.

I think it's also cogent to note that Robertson wasn't going out of his way to slander anyone. He was asked a question, and he honestly answered it. And for that he's vilified. That's wrong.

Anyone who believes that A&E violated the CRA are idiots.

[kalm]

Here ya go SH...the difference between Bashir and Robertson and free speech and employer rights.

Could you imagine the uproar if someone passed a law saying that Martin Bashir couldn't be bounced from a broadcast job for saying Sarah Palin was a good candidate to have feces shoved in her mouth? Now that would be censorship.

Remember, nobody heard a peep from Sarah Palin about free speech after that episode. Bashir earlier this year tiptoed across the line in an angry diatribe about Palin's invocation of slavery imagery, which she had somewhat amazingly used to describe the suffering (presumably white) middle Americans will feel when they are forced to pay for the "free stuff" the Obama administration is handing out, i.e. health care:

Our free stuff today is being paid for today by taking money from our children and borrowing from China. When that money comes due and, this isn't racist, so try it, try it anyway, this isn't racist, but it's going to be like slavery when that note is due. Right? We are going to be beholden to a foreign master.

She elaborated:

And it is in a way, it is slavery in a way, because it is making all of us subservient to the government, and it was never about health care. It was about control.

Palin's mind is amazing. Slavery was purely a private-enterprise abomination. It had nothing to do with being subservient to the government. It was the opposite of that, actually. She was also wrong in the sense that the health care program isn't "free stuff" (even those who will receive subsidized care will be paying in one form or another for their policies).

So she pulled off a Friedman-esque anatomical impossibility there, getting three feet in her mouth at the same time.

First, she was wrong about slavery. Then she was wrong about health care. Then, thirdly, she was almost insanely insensitive and inappropriate in her use of the word slavery at all, comparing white middle class angst over having to partially subsidize health care for their poor (and mostly nonwhite) neighbors to being whipped and tortured across generations of institutional racist terror.

Bashir reacted to this by telling a story about slaves who were forced to defecate in each others' mouths, and then suggested that Palin, having "scraped the barrel of her long-deceased mind," was a "good candidate" for the same treatment. Soon after, he was essentially forced out of the network.

Again, Palin had no problem with that. In fact, Palin lauded the network once Bashir was out:

It was refreshing to see though, that many in the media did come out and say, 'Look, our standards have got to be higher than this . . .'

The thing is, Robertson's ouster by A&E was exactly the same sort of move – a network sucking it up and distancing itself from an on-air figure because of controversial speech. But because Robertson's views were ones Palin apparently agrees with, suddenly she wasn't talking about anything being refreshing, but instead cried that "free speech is an endangered species."

Palin's inability to grasp the difference between a first-amendment violation and corporate calculation is amazing because she literally just published a book on the subject. Her newly-released War-on-Christmas diatribe, Good Tidings and Great Joy, is all about the efforts by evil Jesus-hating atheists to sue the Christmas out of our public lives. (It's one of the funniest things ever written, by the way. I would write a review but I don't think I could make it all the way to the end without a cardiac episode).

In writing this new book, Palin presumably spent the whole of the last year or so staring right at the issue of what may be said on private property versus what may be said on public property – the difference between putting up a nativity scene in front of a courthouse and putting one up on your lawn. Yet as this latest controversy shows, the underlying issue is still a total blur to her.



Read more: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/bl ... z2o1HIXp8B" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Follow us: @rollingstone on Twitter | RollingStone on Facebook

[ASUMountaineer]

People are now questioning whether A&E violated the Civil Rights Act of 1964 in disciplining Robertson. Title VII of the act prohibits employment discrimination with respect to an employee's race, color, national origin, gender, or religion.

I think it's also cogent to note that Robertson wasn't going out of his way to slander anyone. He was asked a question, and he honestly answered it. And for that he's vilified. That's wrong.

He had every right to say what he said. He chose his words. His remarks brought negative pub to the company he works for.

If a representative of the CBN or Chick Fillet whatever that stupid company's name is) came out in an interview stating that Christians were a bunch of whining, hypocritical cultists worshipping a made up sky god, you would be the last person defending him or denying their business decision.

It's Chick-fil-a, and you shut your whore mouth! I like their chicken and couldn't care less who they don't like.

[ASUMountaineer]

Palin is a non-serious, mentally-diminished, publicity whore. I'm amazed that supposed serious publications (Politico, et al) continue to post articles about her. Obviously, it generates hits for their publications and that is one of the saddest things to come from this situation.

This Duck Dynasty guy--I've never seen the show and don't care to--has not had his 1st Amendment rights violated. That much cannot be disputed.

Martin Bashir, in the same way, did not have his 1st Amendment rights violated. Bashir should be held to a higher standard than the Duck Dynasty guy given his position. He very clearly should have known better.

Lastly, with the Duck Dynasty guy, I find it disheartening that what he says is so important that it can lead news broadcasts. This country really is turning to crap. Thanks conks and donks!

[SDHornet]

ASUM nails it.

[dbackjon]

People are now questioning whether A&E violated the Civil Rights Act of 1964 in disciplining Robertson. Title VII of the act prohibits employment discrimination with respect to an employee's race, color, national origin, gender, or religion.

I think it's also cogent to note that Robertson wasn't going out of his way to slander anyone. He was asked a question, and he honestly answered it. And for that he's vilified. That's wrong.

No, he slandered every gay person in America.

He is a lying piece of shit hypocrite.


It's all an act anyways - they are multi-millionaires who only wear camo, grew the beards, etc for the show.

[Ibanez]

People are now questioning whether A&E violated the Civil Rights Act of 1964 in disciplining Robertson. Title VII of the act prohibits employment discrimination with respect to an employee's race, color, national origin, gender, or religion.

I think it's also cogent to note that Robertson wasn't going out of his way to slander anyone. He was asked a question, and he honestly answered it. And for that he's vilified. That's wrong.

No, he slandered every gay person in America.

He is a lying piece of shit hypocrite.


It's all an act anyways - they are multi-millionaires who only wear camo, grew the beards, etc for the show.

Aren't you slandering him in that post?

[GrizFanStuckInUtah]

But in the photo it sure looks like she's talking about something else! Personal minimum requirements perhaps?

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/12/s ... tml?hp=r11" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

She was talking about my encounter with her when I was in Alaska.

[GrizFanStuckInUtah]

Oh, and about this whole subject....

[dbackjon]

No, he slandered every gay person in America.

He is a lying piece of shit hypocrite.


It's all an act anyways - they are multi-millionaires who only wear camo, grew the beards, etc for the show.

Aren't you slandering him in that post?

Shut up you Coastal Hick

[Ibanez]

Aren't you slandering him in that post?

Shut up you Coastal Hick

See what I did there?