The Fox News Dynasty Comes To The Aid Of The Duck Dynasty

Right-wing blowhards have never been known for their intellectual consistency or for shying away from hypocrisy. They have always been among the first to attack those with whom they disagree and demand satisfaction in the form of terminating the employment of outspoken liberals. There isn’t a progressive public voice whose job hasn’t been threatened by conservative activists who have campaigned for the firing of people like Rachel Maddow, Ed Schultz, and Al Sharpton.

Today, however, these same martinets of virtue are appalled that A&E has suspended Phil Robertson of Duck Dynasty (the show with “nasty” right in its name) after he unleashed a vile tirade of hateful commentary about homosexuality, which he likened to bestiality and rebuked as sin. The debate has consumed conservative media with pundits railing over this intolerable injustice. And leading the charge, of course, is Fox News. Their community website, the lie-riddled Fox Nation, posted six articles on this one subject.

Fox Nation

The magnitude of obsession with a single topic might seem appropriate if the topic were imminent war, a deadly epidemic, a natural disaster, or an economic collapse. But for Fox all it takes is a missing white girl, a high-speed police chase, or a bigoted hillbilly being put on leave from a lucrative television program. And as is always the case when a conservative says something offensive and dumb, his defenders wail about free speech. Here are a few examples of the more hyperbolic grousing that has been heard:

Todd Starnes (Fox): A&E is apparently run by a bunch of anti-Christian, bigots. Duck Dynasty worships God. A&E worships GLAAD. If Phil had been twerking with a duck the network probably would’ve given him a contract extension. But because he espoused beliefs held by many Christians, he’s been silenced.

Ted Cruz: Phil expressed his personal views and his own religious faith; for that, he was suspended from his job. In a free society, anyone is free to disagree with him.

Rush Limbaugh: I think they’ve essentially fired the guy, and in the process, they have thrown away the largest audience on cable television. They’ve just thrown it away. They’ve thrown away all that advertising.

Limbaugh’s complaint is ironic in that he has some personal experience with throwing away advertising by saying stupid and offensive things, like calling a young woman a slut and a prostitute because she advocated in favor of access to reproductive health care. But the larger point regarding free speech is something that conservatives get wrong repeatedly. They seem to believe that free speech means being able to say anything you want, but that no one else has the same privilege if they disagree with you.

The truth is that the Duck Dude has free speech and he exercised it. His critics and defenders also have free speech and they are exercising it. Even A&E has free speech and they are within their rights to punish an employee whose behavior reflects poorly on their enterprise. Robertson’s suspension has not impaired his freedom to speak. He could appear on Fox News tomorrow if he wants and reiterate his repulsive views. I’ll bet he has already received numerous invitations.

Finally, Fox News has an abundance of free speech that they utilize to advance a right-wing agenda. That’s why, in a world that is not lacking for subjects that have a profound impact on people’s lives, Fox has devoted six articles to the triviality of a cable TV reality program whose bigoted star is gonna have stay home in the swamp for a little while enjoying his wealth and killing defenseless creatures.


30 thoughts on “The Fox News Dynasty Comes To The Aid Of The Duck Dynasty

  1. “…Limbaugh…throwing away advertising by saying offensive and stupid things…”

    You apparently missed the updates about how those advertisers have come back. The Limbaugh boycott was very short-lived, and while it was on, it hurt liberal talk radio hosts as well. Just ask Thom Hartmann.

    And did any of you notice, boys and girls? Mark threw out the names of Rachel Maddow and Ed Schultz but left out Martin Bashir. He never touched that ugly little episode, just like the rest of the left wing.

    Oh , and just two other words: Bill Maher. “Nuff said.

    It is the left wing that wallows in hypocrisy.

    • Martin Bashir was fired. . .ahem. . .”resigned” after genuflecting and begging the forgiveness of Sarah Palin (of all people), after Right Wing World EXPLODED over what he said about her. Alec Baldwin was also fired/resigned after a separate anti-gay tirade (what is it with picking on the gays, you guys?). Those are two liberals, or at least hosts on a left-leaning channel, who lost their jobs for saying something deemed inappropriate. Why is this Duck guy any different? Why is he getting the adulation and support from the same right-wingers who demanded the scalp of Martin Bashir?

      And what about Bill Maher? I’m missing the hypocrisy.

      • Martin Bashir said that somebody should urinate and defecate in Sarah Palin’s mouth. To simply call that “inappropriate” doesn’t even come close to illustrating how disgusting that comment was. Phil condemned homosexuality but never called for any action like Bashir’s.

        Bill Maher? He has used the c-word and the t-word to describe Michelle Bachmann and Sarah Palin. He has “joked” about Glenn Beck being shot dead by police, “joked” about Elizabeth Hasselback being gang-raped by an Egyptian mob, and he was NOT joking when he talked in 2006 about how much better off the world would be if Dick Cheney had been assassinated while in Afghanistan. And the left-wing never condemns any of his filth, because he gave $1 million to a pro-Obama superPAC.

        • Why are right-wingers so friggin dense? They get so caught up with false equivalencies that they miss the point every time.

          This isn’t about Bashir or Maher (both of whom lost TV shows over controversial comments). It isn’t even about whether Robertson was right or wrong, or if A&E should have suspended him. It’s about Fox posting six articles in one day on this stupid, overblown, reality TV douche-bag bullshit. But it obviously keeps people like you, Scott, occupied.

          • Mark, isn’t this whole “controversy” really about the damage done by political correctness? How we have come to this point is more the issue.

            • You have no idea as to who or what people think, you assume we’re all racists crazies and therefore must be “FORCED” to comply with your view of what is right and/or wrong – which of course is why the bill of rights is so critical to our freedoms. If someone – anyone – wants to hate all minorities and gays, they can and should be permitted to. So long as they aren’t hurting anyone, let any individual hate whoever they want – it’s none of your business. And let them speak out about it too. And we can still use the “N” word – we make a personal choice to use it or not idiot.

          • Bill Maher lost his TV show on ABC eons ago. He then switched to HBO and grew 100 times more hate-filled. And the mainstream media for some reason continues to regard this disgusting human being as a brilliant satirist. Ugh.

            “Controversial comments”? That’s your only description of what Martin Bashir said? That’s the first time you have ever mentioned Bashir’s vile screed, and you wouldn’t even condemn it. You’re the one who is dense – and hypocritical.

            • When I see someone say we are being too politically correct, I immediately think that person wishes they could still use the “N” word.

  2. What amazes me the most is how the RWNJ’s try to make this a 1st amendment issue. They keep posting on Facebook and other places that he has a 1st amendment right to say anything he wants. I am afraid most of them have never even read the 1st amendment.

    • You would think right-wingers would support the employer’s rights, as they do in the form of constantly bashing unions or anyone who supports paying a living wage. Yet they apparently believe that Robertson’s employer should not have the right to get rid of an employee whose values clearly don’t align with its own. The “political correctness run amok” argument is just a red herring for them to rationalize their need see that others hate just as much as they do. Conservatives are not exactly an introspective bunch.

      • That’s an excellent point. Conservatives are all for free-market autonomy when it suits them. They oppose laws prohibiting employment discrimination by race, gender, sexual orientation, etc. They think companies should be able to decide what kind of health care you can receive through insurance you pay for. They want to shift the balance of power from the people and the unions that represent them, back to the corporations. Yet if the company wants to exercise its own standards of conduct that actually reflect on the company, that’s out of bounds.

        • To me, their logic always seems to bend toward nostalgia for some lost America where it was safe and perfectly acceptable for straight white Americans to run the show and put others in their place. Unfortunately, this fascist streak doesn’t always square with the free-market principles they profess to love. So enters the “politcal correctness” bogeyman. This is really no different than my mother-in-law complaining about Spanish being spoken over the PA system at Home Depot. When I pointed out to her that a large number of their customers are Spanish-speaking and that it was the free market in action, what was her response? No, the company HAS to broadcast in Spanish or “they” will complain that “they” are not being “catered” to!

      • You clowns, as you always do, suggest Fox News speaks for all conservatism. It does not – it speaks for itself and at most the republican party, which is not conservative in it’s current form. You’re now working your way into propaganda territory – but you live there quite a bit anyway.

  3. I just watched a you tube video showing coverage on CNN Live and they had some gay rights activist on there suggesting Phil Robertson needs to get in line with his thinking because of changing attitudes – around 1:05 I think – now that is leftism at its best, we are no longer allowed to think what we want if not politically correct and socially acceptable – Mark, the world may be where you want it to be after all – no unauthorized or non-state sanctioned beliefs permitted.

    • Yorkster you can say whatever you want and you can think whatever you want. But you do not have a 1st amendment right to do so. There are consequences for actions.And of course you can use the “N” word as often as you like. And probably do. However, I would be careful. We had a guy at work always dropping the “N” word around other white employees. That stopped the day one of the white employees 250 pound black husband came in to see her. Most uncomfortable I ever saw the “N” word dropping guy.

      • Thanks for the early Christmas Gift. Finally someone here who is honest about what he really thinks. You’re wrong of course, but honest and you deserve some respect as I’ve seen very little true honesty here. And no matter how hard you try, we still all have a right to think and say what we want – no matter how horrible it may be to you – and there is nothing you can do about it. You really don’t know much about what I think as I really haven’t said except that we can think and say what we want. And we will continue to do that – even with your faulty belief that we can’t. You’ll need to do better to get to me – I’ve been called all kinds of things here and it hasn’t made a difference. But again, your honesty is still refreshing and enjoyable.

      • Rick, how exactly do you propose we control what people think and/or say if you don’t happen to like it? Please, enlighten us. If we don’t have that right – how do you propose we control it? write laws? throw people in jail – please let us into your perfect world.

        • Like I said…you can say anything you want. Of course the supreme court has ruled there are limitations. Best example is you can not yell fire in a crowded theater. There are also laws against slander and libel.
          Having said that, you can say anything else you want. Just man up and be accountable for what you say. If you make ignorant, intolerant remarks in public, your employer has the right to take action.

          • Why don’t you take your own advice and be a man and take responsibility for what you said:
            “Yorkster, you can say what ever you want and think whatever you want. But you do not have a 1st amendment right to do so” so now you’re walking back you statement – you can bullshit all you want – your “clarification” is bullshit and does not reflect all your comments – you really want it to mean we can’t say anything we want or believe anything we want – that is clear from sum total of your comments. Just say what you clearly believe – freedom of expression is only ok if it’s what you believe so we really don’t have that right in your world. For once I thought we had an honest lib here – I was wrong.

            • Hard to debate with someone who does not read or understand your posts. You do not have an unlimited 1st amendment right. There are lots of restrictions. But if you say something that is covered by the 1st amendment, you still have to take responsibility for the consequences of what you say. Not that hard to understand.

  4. I don’t think people talking about first amendment rights in these…massively stupid issues, have any idea what they’re talking about. The bill of rights is law. Firing someone for saying something, anything, doesn’t violate any law. A violation of first amendment rights would be getting locked up for saying something. The bill of rights is law, and it spells out the limitations of the powers of the state, not of a&e. Telling someone to stfu because you think what they just said is fucking stupid is not….repeat-NOT a first amendment violation. Neither is firing them. Why does anyone care about these issues? ‘Someone got fired for saying something I agree with.’ Well, I guess we’re at the point where saying you think people whom you’ve never and will never meet are doomed to hell, (eternal brutally painful afterlife), because of an arbitrary selection from a series of fables and anecdotes and stories compiled into a book that was put together about 1,700 years before the scientific method was around, used more often than not to simply justify and moralize hatred, makes you a pariah. Oh well, I guess if you think things that might get you fired you probably shouldn’t say them, or go look for another job. Chalk it up to the outrage of fools. There’s no other way to describe this silliness.

    Firing someone for saying something isn’t a first amendment rights violation; if you think that then you’re just a stupid person. Stopping someone from ever saying something to anyone anywhere forever, like with prison time or with other threats, that’s a first amendment rights violation.

    • It’s really not all about the 1st amendment – it’s about hypocrisy by leftists (and that is general – not everyone thinks like this I’m sure) who want to be able to silence speech they determine is bad. The government is NOT trying to silence anyone in this case – but I would argue that if it was possible, leftist types would silence anyone who spoke “offensively” about some “sacred” group in the name of political correctness. And it isn’t reserved for just leftists, it applies to both sides depending on the specific issue. That Martin Bashir guy was a casualty of right wing outrage. This guy could be a casualty of left wing outrage. Either way, it’s a dangerous precedent.

      • That’s such bullshit. Now, does calling what you just said bullshit mean I ‘want to silence you’? I’ll repeat what I said above, telling someone to stfu because you think they’re wrong or making Olympian stretches to martyr themselves as a victim of logic does not mean that I wouldn’t die for their right to say such wrong pigheaded bullshit. I mean…dude, trying to silence you?? What the fuck does that even mean?? Labeling anyone’s opinion bullshit and wrong, even telling them to abandon everything they believe in and come to the other side, has nothing to do with ‘wanting to silence’ anyone. Do better, cause ‘they want to silence us’ is weak as fuck dude.

      • Steve in York, you are once again making no sense at all, but this time you are doing it in a different blog thread. At least this time you admit up front it has nothing to do with the First Amendment. But it also has nothing to do with “leftists.” Once again I have to explain to you that this was a business decision by A&E. The Head Quack made comments that a portion of the viewers found repugnant, as he vented bigoted and racist comments. Previously he did this privately but now he did it in a major publication as a representative of his show and A&E. This has alienated viewers and, therefore, advertisers. So his suspension was not a First Amendment issue, not a leftist plot (or whatever contrived action you claim), but a simple business decision. So stop trying to bring politics into this issue, or making statements that this is a “leftist” plot. It is not and you are showing your ignorance with a contrived analysis. And stop trying to sound smart because you obviously are not and that is what is coming through.

  5. All these discussions go the same from both sides from what is the real truth of what happened to what you want it to be. The truth is what was said came straight out of the bible witch is what Phil and His family beleave in. Believe in God or not is up to you but that’s the plain truth. I do beleave that A&E has the chose to do what they feel is right that’s one of the great thing of being an American is being free to say what you think Even if others don’t agree. Just my thought.

    • Oh, I see. You have the bible that compares homosexuality to bestiality and terrorism, and calls gays God-haters. It’s the same bible that talks about the happy, singing African-Americans in the Jim Crow era south. I think it’s called the King Duck version. Otherwise, most of what Robertson said does NOT come straight out of the bible that everyone else has.

  6. “Don’t be deceived. Neither the adulterers, the idolaters, the male prostitutes, the homosexual offenders, the greedy, the drunkards, the slanderers, the swindlers — they won’t inherit the kingdom of God. Don’t deceive yourself. It’s not right.” Do not have sexual relations with an animal and defile yourself with it. A woman must not present herself to an animal to have sexual relations with it; that is a perversion. Not sure of what your version states but this what I found in my version.

    • Hey tjm, I’m looking to sell my daughter into slavery, know any good buyers?

      I caught my grandfather wearing a garment sown of two different threads, can the whole town get in on the stoning him to death for it or does it have to be a family execution? Either way we’re gonna make a weekend out of it.

      Hope you don’t like pork, otherwise you totally deserve to die, ya know, says god.

      My neighbor’s growing two different crops side by side, I’m a man of god so I was thinking of cutting his and his family’s throats tonight while they sleep. You in?

      You arbitrarily pick and choose what rules to follow, just as arbitrarily as those rules are arbitrary themselves. Gay people? Why? The fuck do you care? Beastiality makes sense, but because animals can’t consent, not as just another arbitrary rule. If anybody wants to genuinely believe that a human male living somewhere in space created all of reality with magical powers that set forward rules and commands in which the reward for obedience only comes to you after you’re dead, fine. Be a fool like that. Lean not on your own understanding, right?? Have faith=Be blind. But ya know, whatever you want. Just keep the religiously justified hatred to yourself, even if that shit is solicited from you by a magazine.

Comments are closed.