MSNBC's butter and egg man, Ed Schultz, is off on another silly rant. This time, he takes issue with Rush Limbaugh's description of the battle between Steny Hoyer and James Clyburn for a leadership position within the Democrats in the House of Representatives.
3 comments:
It is a very tough issue. There have been many times when I've objected to things that were said publicly that were hurtful. I called them "Hate Speech" but I have never called for any disciplining of anyone because of the content of their speech.
As you mentioned, even besides invoking the Fairness Doctrine, generally for the last 25 years or so, it is the Democrats who typically call for the criminalization of acts of their predecessors in office or legal action against their opponents.
.
If there ever was a president who should have investigated his predecessor, it was George W Bush. He made it a point not to.
Liberals are spineless, and lack creativity in responding to hate speech that is generally pretty pathetic. Hillary is afraid of the bogeyman, so she won't stand up in public and give a direct answer.
That's one of many reasons why I decline to be a liberal. Socialist maybe, liberal, never. If I had the money to put "Air America" together, it would have driven Rush out of the ratings, with content that didn't insult the intelligence of the working class, or, for that matter, of the so-called intellectuals.
Something I'll give George W. Bush for is the comment (which he has adhered to in practice) "President Obama deserves my silence." It is a consideration that only those who have been there seem to have for their successors, of whatever party or ideology.
Post a Comment