He's free to speak, and they're free to fire him. That's always been the deal, right? I didn't see any upset conservatives when Bill Maher got the axe for the simple observation that some physical bravery is involved in flying a plane into a building.
Shockingly that is the point I wanted to make. When did Bill Maher join the Loony Left? When did Imus join the Extreme Right. Why is this seen as points scored for one side or the other.
Nowadays, if you aren't dogmatic about your political affiliation, you end up branded as a member of the opposite extreme. Bill Maher is an AM radio poster-child for how the evil Hollywood liberals are infiltrating politics. Imus, who is typically just a banal but bombastic moderate, has gotten the same treatment from the far left because he insults some of their pet causes
( ... )
The "Us/Them" nature of this is of interest. Before this I had thought of Imus as a left of center shock jock who was given a pass for all the mean spirited thing he said because of the work he did for children with cancer. I have listened on occasion and find much of what he did insulting. Like others before him, he will go to satelite radio and insult more people to rebuild his audience.
No, Imus got his ass handed to him by the spineless corporations faced with a couple charlatans. If the market forced him out, the show would continue, but, facing slipping ratings, radio stations would cancel their syndication and eventually, no one would bother broadcasting him.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
After many court decisions and the 14th amendment, "Congress" should basically be read as "Any branch of any level of government."
However, it's very important to note that this amendment does *not* guarantee free speech. It does not say that the government must work to protect your right to speech, nor does it prohibit private citizens or companies from curtailing the way that people speak in the purview of their own company.
If the government tried to force the radio station to fire Imus, that would have been a first amendment violation. But the radio station making the decision on its own is fine.
Are you saying that if someone was to have a political rally, and a group of masked brutes with baseball bats beat them up, it would only be an assault and not an attempt to abridge the free speech right of others? Would it be a hate crime?
It would be assault. As far as I know, there is no crime for "attempting to abridge the freedom of speech". Any such thing would be covered under assault, harassment, trespassing, etc.
As for whether it would be a hate crime or not, that depends on the situation.
Comments 41
Reply
Reply
Reply
The "Us/Them" nature of this is of interest. Before this I had thought of Imus as a left of center shock jock who was given a pass for all the mean spirited thing he said because of the work he did for children with cancer. I have listened on occasion and find much of what he did insulting. Like others before him, he will go to satelite radio and insult more people to rebuild his audience.
Reply
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
(The comment has been removed)
Reply
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
No, Imus got his ass handed to him by the spineless corporations faced with a couple charlatans. If the market forced him out, the show would continue, but, facing slipping ratings, radio stations would cancel their syndication and eventually, no one would bother broadcasting him.
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Reply
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
After many court decisions and the 14th amendment, "Congress" should basically be read as "Any branch of any level of government."
However, it's very important to note that this amendment does *not* guarantee free speech. It does not say that the government must work to protect your right to speech, nor does it prohibit private citizens or companies from curtailing the way that people speak in the purview of their own company.
If the government tried to force the radio station to fire Imus, that would have been a first amendment violation. But the radio station making the decision on its own is fine.
Reply
Reply
As for whether it would be a hate crime or not, that depends on the situation.
Reply
Leave a comment