The right wing's defense of the Duck Dynasty Dullard

[DemocratSinceBirth]

How that's for alliteration?

The First Amendment doesn't protect you from the consequences of your speech. It only protects you from the government regulating your speech. Duh.

The major problem I have with the Duck Dynasty Dullard is that he reduces people to the sum of their sexual acts. Most of the gay and straight folks I know aren't spending all their time having sex and obsessing about their partners genitalia. Folks don't decide who they like and love. It just happens. And the genitalia that comes with the person is the consequence and not the cause.

And now I see that some so called liberals are enabling this disingenuous defense. Of course I don't think Phil Robertson belongs in the hoosegow for his comments but neither do I think his employer has an obligation to give him a national platform to spew them. How about Fred Phelps? His clan is colorful...Would these enablers say a major cable network should give him and his clan a reality show?

[In_The_Wind]

1. Kick

[progressoid]

2. I have a few family members pulling out that "free speech" canard.

It's...well...frustrating tying to talk sensibly with them about it.

[MisterP]

6. canard, of course, meaning "duck"

[RedCappedBandit]

3. Beautifully stated.

[The_Commonist]

4. I see you haven't gotten caught up yet.

It's all an elaborate and deliberate con job. We've been punked, and we've totally fallen into the trap. Yet again. This has nothing to do with freedom of speech, and is completely about ratings and money. This is one of those manufactured controversies that really makes liberals look silly. We are addicted to outrage, and have created entire websites, like this one, to get our daily dose of outrageahol. We fall for it every time Sarah Palin says anything, we fall for it every time a Megyn or some other Fox employee says something, and it's really getting quite boring. The "other side" knows how easy it is to push our buttons and we fall for it over and over and over and over and over and over.

I maybe heard about these Duckers for the first time a few weeks ago, didn't know or care anything about them, and now they've carried several news cycles. The whole thing is a marketing ploy. The beards are bullshit, the guy is already wealthy, and he was planning on leaving the show anyway. Now... they got all this free publicity, there will be controversy still when the next season begins and he's not on it, spiking the ratings, and I'm sure all the "kindred spirits" who feel he's a "victim" will flock to buy his ducks, or whatever it is that he does. It's really kinda sad that I know this much about these people now, but I'm a sucker.

AND... We're all suckers because it's all a giant distraction for the corporate media, to make us forget about the fact that nobody has any money to spend for christmahannuhkwanzafestinaliamas. Seriously, this was a brilliant move, on many levels, and we've been punked yet a gain.



On edit, and upon reflection - I think it's important at this point for me to make clear that "conservatives" are suckers too. My point was that we on the proper side of history believe that we know what's going on and we don't. We constantly fall in the trap of suckerhood, and there are people laughing at us all the way to the bank. They're laughing at the conservative suckers too. But we think we are so much smarter and we're not. I'm tired of being a sucker. My New Year's resolution is give up my addiction to outrage.

[Kingofalldems]

5. Of course, they want their idiot Fox viewers to believe

Obama got Phil! fired.

*Phil! = the new Benghazi!