Jack-Booted Fascists of the Radical Left Take on Duck Dynasty’s Phil Robertson

BringBackPhil

In one of the most insane moves since Coke introduced “New Coke” to a fan base that didn’t want corporate eggheads messing with the things they enjoyed, A&E announced tonight that they are suspending Duck Dynasty star and patriarch Phil Robertson for personal remarks he made opposing homosexuality.  Instantly, the twitterverse lit up with boycotts, outrage and disgust — similar to that found when the LBGT extremists took on Chick-Fil-A because the founder also expressed his personal opinions.

Once again, the public is shown that “tolerance” is a one-way street and the First Amendment doesn’t apply to those who dare refuse the group think of political correctness.  Every time the Human Rights Campaign, GLAAD or any other LBGTQ spokesmen gets the vapors over someone daring to question their lifestyle choices, some corporate scaredy cat freaks and throws freedom of speech, freedom of religion and the right to free expression of unpopular thoughts or opinions under the bus faster than one can say “Rosie O’Donnell”.

Hopefully, the rocket-scientist dropouts at A&E will get a hopper-full of email post haste which might drive them to their senses.  Care to drop the fine folks in charge an email expressing your opinion (while you still can without getting kicked off the internet)?  Here’s the contact email: feedbackaetv@aenetworks.com.

Here’s a list of the A&E Stations: http://www.aenetworks.com/contact

Here’s a link to the article announcing the decision: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/duck-dynastys-phil-robertson-indefinite-666808

 

6 thoughts on “Jack-Booted Fascists of the Radical Left Take on Duck Dynasty’s Phil Robertson

  1. Brent Coffey

    “The First Amendment doesn’t apply”??? LOL. No, it doesn’t. The First Amendment only prevents the govt. from censoring people. It doesn’t prevent anyone in the private sector from censoring people, and A&E is in the private sector. For instance, your church has the right to censor the views of atheists. If your church, as an organization in the private sector, didn’t have the right to censor views, then your pulpit would have to give equal air time to Satanists and atheists alike. Would you agree with the complaints of Satanists and atheists were they to scream, “Fascism!” and “First Amendment!” for being censored in your church? Probably not.

    To recap what we’ve learned, the First Amendment has NOTHING to do with what’s happening to the Robertson Family, because A&E does not equal the Federal govt, the One World govt, or any other branch of govt that you’re stewed about.

    Also, fascism? Really? You’re well versed in political terms, aren’t you?

    You know what’s actually happening to Robertson? The free market has spoken, and the free market says that, at least at the moment, there’s a greater demand for Robertson to be suspended than for his views to get air time. You may not like how the free market has ruled. You may strongly disagree with the free market’s ruling. But A&E (and the rest of the liberal media that you loathe) are private, for-profit businesses, and, as a conservative, you’re obligated to defend their right to broadcast what they decide, if you’re to be principled in your defense of free markets. So, this isn’t fascism, this isn’t a First Amendment issue, and this is the free market at work. And you aren’t one to suggest that there’s such a thing as market failure, are you?

    Reply
  2. Brent Coffey

    By the way, please demonstrate that you understand the liberal political perspective here. The ACLU is the exemplar of liberals who believe in First Amendment rights for all. As such, it speaks on behalf of the majority of American liberals, as its views are representative of the average liberal’s views. So, please demonstrate how the ACLU is being hypocritical, unjust, unfair, etc. to Phil Robertson. Know what? You can’t. Know why? Because you’re politicizing a non-political issue.

    FWIW, I’m a liberal Democrat, I strongly support gay people’s right to equality, and I think Robertson’s views are morally wrong and offenseive. But I still don’t think he should’ve been suspended, I agree that the network overreacted, and I hope that A&E brings him back.

    Reply
  3. Jason

    Have you read what Phil actually said? Some of his language was rather crude. I’m sure not everyone who says #IStandWithPhil knows exactly what he said to GQ.

    Reply
  4. Aaron Blumer

    Agree w/the spirit of the post, but want to echo those who have observed that fascism and first amendment are not relevant here. Speech is never truly “free” in voluntary contractual relationships between private parties… unless of course it’s stipulated that you can say absolutely anything you want with no repercussions.
    And fascism… yeah, that’s a government thing too.

    I really think that though A&E is doing some bullying here (all they have to do is make sure they edit skillfully with their show), it doesn’t help the cause of religious liberty to identify w/this guy at all. Evangelicals should save their outrage for cases that are both more weighty and more cleanly defensible.

    Reply
    1. admin Post author

      Aaron, Brent and others….I truly do understand the First Amendment and the Freedom of Speech as it relates to our constitution. However, The First Amendment guarantee of Freedom of Speech (and Freedom of Religion) is more than just a provision in the US Constitution — it is a uniquely American value and one that historically, all institutions — not just the government valued. Our post-modern Orwellianism and the liberal bent of jurists who don’t understand Original Intent of the Founders combined with Postmodern philosophy and tactics has reparsed the definitions and practices surrounding those values.

      There was a day when it was common practice to say something along the lines of, “I disagree with what you are saying, but I’ll fight to the death for your right to say it.” Instead today it has become, “I disagree with what you are saying, and I’ll do my best to destroy your reputation, your business, your employment and your finances.” All this in the era of “tolerance”????

      This really isn’t about Duck Dynasty, Chick-Fil-A or Paula Dean. It is about a new sort of liberal fascism (and I use that term intentionally — if liberals can change and tweak definitions, so can conservatives) which is being used to intimidate into silence, using politically-correct jargon and thuggish tactics that most frequently was found in Mafia-style discipline. Good people who have differing perspectives are now being intimidated into silence so that they can keep their jobs, not harm their businesses and avoid the bright glare of elitist outrage. The thing that makes this situation interesting is that Phil Robertson doesn’t give a flip about what the elite think of him and he won’t be controlled by their outrage or the potential loss of money. That has turned him into an unlikely folk hero.

      To the good folks that note his crudeness…yep, he’s crude. Like generations of Americans before him. Might I mention that some of them lived in the White House (Andrew Jackson, Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon for starters….and does it get any cruder than Bill Clinton’s crusty souvenir, Joe Biden dropping the F-Bomb into Obama’s ear or the gay activists standing in front of the portrait of Reagan with middle fingers extended? Where was the outrage about crudity then?)

      I see this as a humorous example of God using the foolish things of this world to confound the wise. Phil Robertson — many of us who grew up in the fly-over parts of this country know him…but we call him “uncle” or “grandpa” or identify him with one of our old neighbors. Frankly, I don’t get the outrage of him saying “anus” or “vagina” — perfectly scientific terms, when sports heroes, politicians, entertainers, multiple evangelical celebrity “preachers” and many others use far more graphic terms for the same parts of the anatomy. Why are we so anxious to distance ourselves from a brother speaking his mind? Is it because we so crave the world’s acceptance? Well, it’s going to take a lot more than that.

      Brent…welcome back…haven’t seen you in a while. Not going to jump to the ACLU debate today…to much going on. But I will agree with you, they are an exemplar — but not of the values you cite. They are about as extreme as one can get and the 1% of their cases they take up for more conservative causes does not undo their leftist agenda that has done great harm to this country. Oddly, I haven’t heard any ACLU folks beyond Paglia (who is not really ACLU) speak up in Robertson’s defense. But, that’s another article and I’m out of time.

      Y’all have a great Christmas. I hope to find a way to go duck hunting this break. Seriously. :-)

      Reply
  5. Brent Coffey

    Merry Christmas, Dan. Thanks for engaging my ideas. :) Best to you and yours. (OH, and, you should update your blog more often! You’re the only Christian blogger I read, and I need to know what you guys think!)

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>