Sarah Palin has some thoughts about ‘intolerants’ hating on Duck Dynasty, y’all

palin1

Yesterday, Sarah Palin decided that she needed more attention. Not content to merely hawk her “War on Christmas” book farce, she chose to chime in on the story of the day, the Duck Dynasty controversy. While there were people defending Phil Robertson, I’d like to think that the overwhelming majority of people found Phil’s GQ interview to be bigoted, offensive and ridiculous. But not Sarah Palin. Palin posted an older photo of herself with the Duck Dynasty people and she wrote on her Facebook:

“Free speech is endangered species; those ‘intolerants’ hatin’ & taking on Duck Dynasty patriarch for voicing personal opinion take on us all.”

[Via Palin’s Facebook]

Instead of merely ripping out my hair and banging my head against a wall, I am going to try to break this down for all of the people who agree with Palin on this and so much more.

First of all, none of us said that Phil Robertson doesn’t have the RIGHT to say whatever he wants. He can say whatever he wants. We have the right to say whatever we want about it. “Free speech” doesn’t protect you from people reacting to your crazy, offensive hate-speech. I have the right to say that Sarah Palin is dumber than a box of cheap skunk weaves, and she has the right to react to that.

Second of all, the “personal opinion” argument. I think this argument might hold water if we came by Phil’s quotes second-hand, if this was a tabloid story about how someone said that Phil said something homophobic. But that’s not the case. He’s a public figure (a reality star on a very successful and lucrative show) who gave a direct, on-the-record interview to a major American publication. This was a public statement made by a public figure, for public dissemination. As Phil said in the interview and in his clarifying statement, he wanted this to become public. In his mind, he’s spreading his own bigoted version of the Gospel.

And my last and final point – like it or not, Phil Robertson is not just some duck guy in the boonies with nothing to lose. He is a commodity, part of an empire worth a lot of money. As the GOP always says, money is speech. The LGBT community, the African-American community, the tolerant community and many more communities have the right to withdraw their support (money) from advertisers who work with Duck Dynasty, because that’s “speech” too.

FFN_Palin_Sarah_RIA_022613_51079939

FFN_Palin_Sarah_MIGUELFF_ROCSTARFF_EXCL_100712_50909692

Photos courtesy of Palin’s Facebook, Fame/Flynet.

 

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

197 Responses to “Sarah Palin has some thoughts about ‘intolerants’ hating on Duck Dynasty, y’all”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. neelyo says:

    Since there’s no horrendous restaurant to eat at to show solidarity, will his fans go out and shoot a duck to show their support?

  2. Frida_K says:

    She is so ugly, in so many ways…for so many reasons…and on so many levels.

  3. akivasha says:

    Nothing else to add other than this is spot on and I completely agree

    • Audrey says:

      Yupp. I’ve been arguing with someone about how it’s not an attack on free speech for an employer to take action. I’m sure it’s in his contract that he can’t damage their brand. This interview hurts a&e if they support him.

      Naturally people also took the least offensive part of his interview (the part saying gays need to answer to God but he won’t hurt em essentially), slapped it on his pic and are claiming that he was suspended for that. Not the part saying homosexuals lead to bestiality and other horrendous crimes.

      He’s a gross person

      • MollyB says:

        The “free speech!” argument drives me NUTS! Freedom of speech protects (most) speech from legal prosecution. NOT from any and all consequences of your words. You are legally free to tell your boss that is wife is a syphilitic hippo but that doesn’t mean he can’t fire you for saying it. No one has arrested this duck hillbilly but that doesn’t mean his employer can’t fire him.

      • Tiffany :) says:

        I agree Audrey.
        He was/is and employee of A&E, and he was doing the interview in his role as employee promoting the show. If this type of thing makes A&E’s advertisers pull from the show’s ad space, A&E has every right to suspend their employee for the consequences of his actions on their product.

      • gefeylich says:

        Not to mention his remarks that African-Americans were better off and happier under Jim Crow laws. All his defenders keep glossing over that part.

  4. Lindy79 says:

    All the crap she spouts aside (if that’s possble)…The last picture is of a person who could have been the Vice President of the United States.

    Jesus Effing Christ….

  5. Virgilia Coriolanus says:

    What’s this about Palin’s ‘War on Christmas’ book???

  6. Anna says:

    I am a “conservative” and “Right-ist” in my views, a former card-carrying member of the Republican Party….and I just CRINGE at what has become of that side of American politics with idiots of this ilk claiming to represent my views. Ghastly.

    • Bananapants says:

      Me, too, Anna. Nowadays I’d vote for a paper towel before I’d vote for anyone the Rigt is pushing.

    • Mich says:

      I have never been a conservative but have many friends who are. Some of them even played major roles in Republican campaigns from the State to Presidential levels. More than one is disgusted and confused by what has happened to the party.

      • Megan says:

        I am not a republican but I do feel really bad for those moderate republicans. I mean they are vilified and destroyed and it is just wrong. I know liberals can do that on the extreme but it feels like they are small in the overall liberal/democratic party.

        I mean the Republicans had a smart, dedicated hard working, moderate would work with both parties in Jon Huntsman and the republican party destroyed him because he worked for Obama. I mean several republicans even said they were against the shut down but were afraid of the fallout if they didn’t vote for it! Really? that damaged this country majorly. It terrible.

      • Tiffany :) says:

        Megan,
        I agree, I also feel bad for the many moderate republicans out there that aren’t being well represented by the louder, more extremist members of the party.

        My sympathy for moderates only goes so far, though. During the presidential primary and debate season, I was wondering WHY weren’t the moderates participating more in the primaries? The vast majority of the finalists for representing the party on the national level were very conservative. I was hoping that the majority of the GOP didn’t subscribe to the views presented during the debates…but the way debate performance would predict primary sucess was very disheartening.

    • HappyMom says:

      Right there with you. UGH!!

    • Jedi says:

      I’m from Canada, and i just can not wrap my head around this new version of the republican party and “conservatives” in the US. You guys are making our conservative party look like left-wing puppy dogs. seriously. if the GOP wants to rework its policies, they need to take a few lessions from the CPC – banish the crazy to the back rooms and never ever let it out.

      • sienna says:

        I’m from Canada too and I totally agree. I think its because in Canada conservative politics are fiscally right-wing but they are rarely morally right-wing. Thank goodness!

      • Andrea says:

        I’m an American living in Canada and I must say your politics up here is a breath of fresh air (although a tad boring) except of course for Rob Ford ****Gags**** I am living in Toronto and cannot wait for the circus to end. Anyone who voted for him should be ashamed of themselves. But the shove down your throat blending of religion and politics that has occurred in the states has made me very sad and come to loathe American politics. BTW, I peacefully protested Sarah Palin in NC in 2008 and am so thankful I did!

  7. Arock says:

    Wtf are you wearing ?
    Wtf are you saying?
    And why the fuck are you talking?
    Sit down Sarah plain, the adults are speaking.

  8. Ag says:

    “Sarah Palin has some thoughts[.]” Does not compute.

  9. Josephine says:

    Kinda sad how she keeps interjecting herself into issues, hoping that somehow she’ll be relevant again.

  10. dahlianoir says:

    and she wanted to be vice president ? My fellow american celebitches, you sure dodged a bullet.

  11. cr says:

    So Martin Bashir says some pretty stupid/hateful/offensive things about you and he deserves to get fired. However, when Phil’s hateful comments are criticized his First Amendment rights are being violated.
    How convenient.

    • BernieMac says:

      This is a great comment. The hypocrisy is rife with Ms. Palin.

    • Sam says:

      I think both of these are pretty good cases for how WELL the first amendment works. People are free to push back against speech they find offensive. This is actually the First Amendment in action right now!

      • Mich says:

        No it isn’t. This isn’t a First Amendment issue. The government has not censored him. He isn’t facing legal prosecution, or being shipped off to Gitmo or being ushered into a ‘free speech zone’.

      • Sam says:

        But Mich, it is. The First Amendment was designed to create an abundance of speech – which includes criticism. The backlash is an example of the amendment working exactly as it was designed to. Phil can say whatever he wants, and everybody else can then do exactly as they want – included symbolic and economic speech like boycotts.

        I think you’re thinking of the Amendment too narrowly. While it is written as a constraint on the government, the Amendment has been construed to apply to a number of private activities if they are touched by government action, so you’re technically incorrect that the amendment can only apply to government action.

        EDIT: I think we are talking past each other. You don’t see the Amendment as involved at all here. But I do, specifically because this is the kind of situation it was meant to encourage. Speech should not be constrained simply because it should be met with more speech.

    • Mich says:

      Martin Basheer (and Bill Maher) said rotten things about no one BUT Sarah Palin in these examples. Palin and her ilk say terrible and cruel things about large swaths of the American population. Beyond that, they fight tooth and nail to make the lives of anyone not like them as miserable and painful as possible because Jesus somehow told them to.

      She is a terrible, horrible person. She is dumb as a rock. She is narcissistic and selfish to the core. She is hateful, spiteful, bigoted and mean. And if the God she wraps herself up in to excuse her behavior is the ‘true’ God, then I would rather be judged harshly at the End Times and be sent somewhere else for eternity.

  12. Tiffany27 says:

    LOL this was the wrong person to get your back Phil.
    Is anyone really shocked that the dudes from Duck Dynasty aren’t LGBTQ supporters?

  13. Sachi says:

    She’s loving those cheek fillers and botox, isn’t she? She looks more baked and over-processed now than she did in 2008.

    Why is she so thin and looks like a part of the Real Housewives crew?

    • Cazzee says:

      Actually I think Sarah Palin looked quite beautiful in 2008, which was part of the problem. She had recently given birth and was still ripe and luscious. People responded to her visually and didn’t listen to the words coming out of her mouth.

      Now that she kind of looks like someone put her into a food dehydrator, people are able to pay attention to what she has to say.

      • TG says:

        LOL on your “food dehydrator” description. I am 3 years into raising a toddler and that is how I feel like I look most of the time. Regards to Palin I never pay attention to her, Coulter, O’Reilly, etc. They are in it for the money. I used to get riled up listening to any of them until years ago I figured it out so just like the Kartrashian’s if you want them to go away just ignore them. Now I am guilty of commenting on Kartrashian articles on this site and of course this Palin article but other then this one I NEVER pay attention to those people.

    • Christin says:

      Since she was a pageant-type with a broadcasting background, I suspect she’s had some work done, then lost weight. She’s looking extremely haggard.

  14. Esmom says:

    Right on, Kaiser.

    And now I need to go bleach my eyes thanks to that last image. I said it the first time I saw it — when we can someone’s butt cheeks from the FRONT something is seriously wonky.

  15. Neffie says:

    Thank You, i always tell people ‘you are allowed to say whatever you like’ but don’t expect someone not to react because of ‘free speech’

  16. DawnOfDagon says:

    Gemma Teller Morrow, what happened to your face?

  17. The Original G says:

    You are entitled to your opinion. You are not entitled to a TV show.

    That’s freedom too.

  18. Aims says:

    Yes Sarah please preach to the world about your opinion on free speach. The world needs your wisdom regarding this topic. Eyeroll.

    She again is putting the nail in her coffin. Nobody is saying phil isn’t allowed to say what he wants. But if you’re going to be a bigot you better brace yourself for the storm. Again it shows how really uninformed and obtuse she really is. As long as someone represent her ideas of how someone should live, she’ll open up her uneducated ignorant mouth.

  19. GeeMoney says:

    Who lets this woman speak?

    I swear, if I ever met John McCain (or whomever was responsible), I would just slap him/her for unleashing Sarah Palin on us, the poor, undeserving public.

  20. sandy says:

    While he is entitled to his opinion, however offensive that may, A&E executives also have a right to their opinion. And clearly their opinion is that homophobic comments by a highly public television personality are bad for ratings and likely to incite a backlash from not only the gay community, but from a whole bunch of straight people who also find his anti-gay comments grossly offensive.

  21. Hannah says:

    Right on, Kaiser!

    Btw, how ridiculous is it that Palin actually usesit “hatin’” in a written statement?

  22. Peanut says:

    Can you IMAGINE if she would have made it into office as vice-president?! My god. She’s barely a step above a real housewife.

  23. queenfreddiemercury says:

    Thank you Kaiser. Everything you said was spot on and I have nothing to add.

  24. Falula says:

    SHE COULD HAVE BEEN THE VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

    I remember the day the GOP announced her as the running mate. My friends and I were waiting for a table at breakfast and we immediately started looking into her history. Before we sat to eat, we had declared her completely incompetent and insane. There was a guy nearby obviously laughing at us. Who’s laughing now?

  25. Kiddo says:

    “Thoughts” in quotation marks would be more appropriate.

    Here is the first Amendment:
    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.

    This man exercised his freedom of speech. The government did not censor him, it did not put him in jail, it did not fine him. It did not punish him what so ever.

    For someone who purports to be an advocate for the constitution, it might help to actually read and understand it, instead of inserting herself into every issue with nonsense word salads.

    • Happyhat says:

      Gotta love the constant abuse around the idea of ‘Freedom of speech’!

    • doofus says:

      and now, we have another potential republican Presidential candidate who also does not know what the First Amendment says.

      Bobby Jindal, gov of Louisiana, is saying that A&E doesn’t understand/respect free speech and that they infringed upon Robertson’s rights.

      • Sloane Wyatt says:

        ITA, mayamae.

        I fault Bobby Jindal for his strong tendency to identify with colonialist values that he injects into his political rhetoric and his policies. Jindal consistently indicates that he would rather harm the poor and people of color than stand for compassion and justice for all.

        I’m wondering whether POC Republicans like Bobby Jindal are suffering from Stockholm Syndrome. A POC in The GOP must embrace Identity Suppression. What a POC must do to succeed in the Republican Party is to assimilate so completely that they deny themselves and their own culture whenever possible. They have to fall all over themselves proving they agree with their base that their own heritage and cultural belief systems are inferior to those of our dominant white culture. The Assimilation, the denial of themselves, cravenly bowing and scraping, and kow towing to whites as their acknowledged betters is what’s required of any Republican of color is disturbing.

    • The Original G says:

      How can Jindal argue his right have been infringed? His views are published in a national magazine and widely reported. He’s had exceptional opportunities to express himself.

      If an entertainment organization like A+E choses not to employ him anymore as entertainer, that’s capitalism. More like Phil can dish it out, but he can’t take it.

      • doofus says:

        seems like a bogus claim to me, but Jindal is yet another guy who might run for national office and he has to show the extreme base in the GOP that, despite his Obama-like brown skin color, he’s really “one of them”.

        and yet another GOP-er who wraps himself in the Constitution but doesn’t really know what it says or what it those words mean.

      • mayamae says:

        I remember watching an interview of him and his wife when he first came on the national scene. They all but disavowed their Indian heritage and culture. Denied eating or even liking Indian food. I remember thinking to myself, if this is what your party requires you to do to be accepted, you’re selling your soul to the devil.

  26. E says:

    I so agree with Kaiser and would like to give Phil this little Bible lesson: http://www.funnyjunk.com/funny_pictures/4535033/West+Wing/

  27. Christin says:

    This woman is so dumb, but there are still people who view her as a genius who was unfairly treated. She can hardly string together a sentence that makes any sense whatsoever.

    • Esmom says:

      “There are still people who view her as a genius who was unfairly treated.”

      I KNOW. Well, “genius” may be overstating it but at the least people thought she was “sassy” and “spunky,” which is apparently enough for some people when it comes to what they think it takes to hold a high office. And it killed/kills me.

    • mayamae says:

      In no way do I think she’s a genius – she’s obviously an imbecile with an abundance of looks and charisma. I do believe the McCain campaign hung her out to dry. If they had spent any time with her or researching her, they would have known exactly what she was. She was already gaining a reputation in Alaska – questions about a faked pregnancy (which I don’t believe), using her political authority to attack and punish her brother-in-law, her son pulling a prank that could have killed a bus full of children, etc. It’s even rumored that it was McCain’s people responsible for dragging out poor pregnant Bristol and putting her on display.

  28. Sam says:

    It’s really unsettling that a person who ran for one of the highest offices in government could be so uneducated about basic civics.

    The First Amendment isn’t applicable here. The government has taken no action against Phil. A&E is a private employer who can take the action they see fit. Nobody has argued that Phil should have been prevented from speaking. Freedom of speech has never, ever meant “speech without consequences.” It just doesn’t. I hated it when the Dixie Chicks crowed about this, and I hate it now. Phil spoke, and now he’s facing the consequences of it. Phil’s freedom was never restricted in any way. He is free to shout whatever he thinks from the rooftops or on any street corner. But a private business doesn’t have a duty to provide a forum for it.

    A&E is a business. Meaning it wants to make money. If this results in the show no longer becoming profitable, or a liability to their overall brand, they will cancel the show (or perhaps try some smaller measure, like removing Phil). They are looking out for the bottom line, period.

  29. Gine says:

    “How dare you be intolerant of my intolerance!” Always my favorite idiotic argument.

  30. TheOriginalKitten says:

    LOL! This lady…always good for a laugh.

  31. Anna says:

    I agree completely with you Kaiser. Phil put out these comments so were allowed to comment on them. Why is it that he’s allowed free speech and personal opinions but when were exercising that same right Palin is whining about it?

    Slightly off topic but it’s related to the “War on Christmas”. Bill O’Reilly recently did a segment on how he’s beaten this war on Christmas and large corporations are once again allowing people to say Merry Christmas and how he’s so against “Happy Holidays”… Well the hilarious thing about it was directly riiiiight before the segment, Fox News wishes all of its viewers a “Happy Holidays”, not a “Merry Christmas” like he wants.
    If anyone’s interested in seeing the video, The Young Turks uploaded it on YouTube calling out his hypocrisy

    • Virgilia Coriolanus says:

      Hilarious!

      I don’t get the whole thing with ‘Happy Holidays’ vs. ‘Merry Christmas’….I would not be offended if either one of those were said to me. I do know that about five years ago, with almost all the stores around me, the employees were not allowed to say ‘Merry Christmas’ (my dad and a woman that I know asked them directly if they were told to just say Happy Holidays, or were they allowed to say Merry Christmas)—but I don’t get that. How does that offend people? That IS what the holiday is.

      • Esmom says:

        I think just because someone is shopping somewhere in December doesn’t mean they necessarily celebrate Christmas. “Happy holidays” works for me because it covers a multitude of holidays that people may be celebrating this time of year. That said, if you know someone celebrates Christmas, then of course it’s fine to say “Merry Christmas.” Just don’t assume everyone does because you do. That’s my stance. :)

      • Virgilia Coriolanus says:

        Well even if I didn’t celebrate Christmas, I would not be offended if someone said to me, in America, ‘Merry Christmas’—even if I was a devil worshipper (we had one in a town next to us–they lynched a Santa Claus in their front yard–creepy). I didn’t realize that saying Merry Christmas vs. Happy Holidays was a huge thing. I don’t make it a point to say either of them, but I just thought it was a really weird thing to get upset or offended over.

      • The Original G says:

        There’s usually Hannukah, Pancha Ganapati, Kwanza, the Winter Solstice, Dōngzhì Festival and a number of other festivals and holidays celebrated by different cultural groups in December. Plus, there’s just the people who are enjoying their statutory holidays.

        While I don’t think that Merry Christmas is offensive, I also don’t get how Happy Holidays is so incendiary? It’s acknowledging the diversity in North America and wishing someone well. We could stand to wish each other well, way more often.

        Peace on Earth. Good Will towards All.

      • Virgilia Coriolanus says:

        @Orig. G.
        I guess I’m a little sheltered, because I don’t live in a diverse area–the majority of people here are either Catholic or Lutheran. The only reason we have non white people living here is because I live about six miles away from Michigan Tech–so I’m not really used to any other holidays, other than the ‘norm’. I don’t think saying ‘Happy Holidays’ is incendiary anymore than I think saying ‘Merry Christmas’ is, but in my experience, saying ‘Merry Christmas’ is a lot more touchy–at least with the stores.

      • Tiffany :) says:

        I dont get it either. I think some folks think “Happy Holidays” is a dig on Christmas…but as a child living in a very Christian part of the country, where I didn’t know anyone who was jewish or non-Christian, I always thought “Happy Holidays” was for Christmas and New Years.

      • doofus says:

        “While I don’t think that Merry Christmas is offensive, I also don’t get how Happy Holidays is so incendiary? It’s acknowledging the diversity in North America and wishing someone well.”

        I just read a great piece on Salon about rape reports on campuses, and how a bunch of trolls spammed the reporting website with fake reports. why? the writer put forth a very good theory about this, framing it with the larger picture of the “white Christian heterosexual male” who is essentially losing his privilege in today’s society. that is, they’re not “special” or more important than any other group in America and have been “demoted” to “regular person”.

        they’re losing their privilege and they don’t like it, and saying Happy Holidays fits into and supports their faux claim of persecution. simply losing your privilege is NOT persecution, but that’s how they see it.

      • cr says:

        I was raised in a religious family but am agnostic. So if someone says Merry Christmas to me I’m not offended. I say Happy Holidays because I have no idea what holiday, if any, you might be celebrating. So don’t get offended either, just take Christmas as your ‘happy holiday’.

      • The Original G says:

        @doofus. I think you’re really on to something, with that theory. Really well put.

        @ VC. I work in an crown corporation in Canada and respecting diversity is considered a core competency. It’s second nature and people your age don’t even get what the debate is about. Diversity is normal to them.

        All I’m saying is give peace a chance. :)

      • doofus says:

        OG, I can’t take credit for that theory as it was the Salon author’s, but thanks… :) I think she was spot on.

        my go-to greeting is from an old Old Navy commercial…Happy ChristmaHanuKwanzakkah.

        seriously, if you’re intention is to WISH SOMEONE WELL, regardless of how you say it, where is the problem?!

      • Joh says:

        One holiday, in the middle of several religious holidays between
        Thanksgiving and New Years .
        You would think the gross commercialization would offend the
        Folks who believe the whole birth of Jesus would find that offensive, but no…..Sarah and bill are riding this sad Chrizmuz pony with their eyes on THEIR pay checks
        And only on their pay checks

      • Esmom says:

        Joh, “You would think the gross commercialization would offend the
        Folks who believe the whole birth of Jesus would find that offensive, but no…..Sarah and bill are riding this sad Chrizmuz pony with their eyes on THEIR pay checks”

        OMG, yes. Truer words were never spoken.

    • lucy2 says:

      I don’t get the “war on Christmas” stuff either. Who is preventing these people from celebrating Christmas!?! Is someone boarding up the doors to their church? Are they breaking into their house and stealing all their decorations and presents? Are they beating people with sticks who wear red or green? If your Christmas, celebrating the birth of your Lord, is destroyed because a stranger says “Happy Holidays” or there’s not a nativity on the lawn of your town hall, you’re not doing it right.

  32. Jaded says:

    Tina Fey, please create another Sarah Palin sketch on SNL about this!!! And get George Clooney and Brad Pitt and Tom Hanks to do the duck brothers!!

  33. Sandydc says:

    I first read about his suspension on People mag and started reading the comments, at the time there were over 300. The vast majority — and I do mean VAST — were pro Phil written by people I am scared to believe are fellow citizens. There are a lot of people out there who support his bigotry. That scares me.

    • Esmom says:

      Big sigh. I have come to realize that the VAST majority of commenters on the Internet are vile haters. This site is a rare and refreshing exception (for the most part). My hometown newspaper (major US city) seems to attract the worst, most bigoted and awful people who seem to have zero concept or regard for thoughtful commentary and it frankly embarrasses me to think that people from other places might think they represent the majority of our residents’ views.

      • TheOriginalKitten says:

        @esmom-I feel like local news sites are the most troll-prone. I see the most upsetting posts in the comments section of Boston.com, even though I’m surrounded by mostly liberal (by “liberal” I don’t mean political affiliation but the literal definition-”broad-minded), tolerant people so it seems strange to read such hateful comments. I just don’t read them anymore because all it did was enrage me.

  34. tifzlan says:

    Phil’s ENTIRE interview was intolerant towards people who aren’t white or Christian. WHATCHU GOT TO SAY ABOUT THAT PALIN?!

  35. Kkhou says:

    It is so nice to hear from people who understand that the first amendment only protects you from government censorship, not personal consequences of your speech! In addition, the fact that he is a public figure and purposefully had his “views” published is notable.

    As an aside, to all those who say we shouldn’t be surprised that he is bigoted: I am from Texas, I have family members who hunt. We (my family) happen to be “liberals” (most of us), but being from Texas I necessarily interact with a large number of conservatives, Republicans and religious Christians, most of whom are actually not bigoted or homophobic. Many are so-calle libertarians, simply religious people, or economic conservatives rather than “social conservatives.” Obviously people who are bigoted are out there, but those labels do not have to go hand in hand. So, while I am not surprised the Robertsons consider themselves “conservative,” or coted Republican, I think his bigotry and hatred toward the LGTB community is indeed surprising an shocking – as it should be.

  36. Dimebox says:

    Sarah Palin is a fine one to talk about hate speech. (or “hatin” as she so eloquently puts it) Once again she is on the wrong side of an issue, only being concerned about the reaction towards Phil. The only hate I see is in his own words. She needs to keep her illiterate, Russia-seeing self quiet. I am now going to fix some hot tea and have a private moment of gratitude that she was not elected to national office.

    • Nerd Alert says:

      I love every word of this comment. Particularly “illiterate, Russia-seeing self.” Bueno.

    • Skye says:

      Few things make me cringe as much as hearing politicians appropriate used-up slang to seem cute or “hep to what the kids say”; it grates on the ears like nails on a chalkboard. “Hatin’?” Really, Sarah? That’s your stance? Haters gonna hate? It’s just a matter of time before O’Reilly asks if she can stay after the commercial break and she tells him she’s down for whatever.

      As far as her not being elected to national office… every time she leaks stupidity somewhere, I want to mail the clip to John McCain with a note that says, “Thanks again.” Because it’s his (and his team’s) shallow, sexist idea that women will vote for anything with tits that forced this talking doll onto the national stage. SHE is his legacy.

      • Tiffany :) says:

        “Because it’s his (and his team’s) shallow, sexist idea that women will vote for anything with tits that forced this talking doll onto the national stage. SHE is his legacy. ”

        DANG! That is so harsh…but sadly, so very true.

      • TheOriginalKitten says:

        So very true. Sadly, McCain used to be one of my favorite Republicans-I always found him to be well-spoken and much more moderate than his right-wing counterparts. I even applauded him for speaking out against the war. That changed REALLY quickly after he ran for president-the true colors definitely came out.

      • Skye says:

        The theory in this house is, 2008 was promised to McCain as payment/consolation prize for getting out of the way of Team Shrub in 2000, even after the trashy, disgusting way they went after him in the SC primary. McCain was a good little team player, lined up behind the Golden Child, bided his time…..and watched his promised “moment” get pre-emptively hijacked by eight years of bungling, arrogant ineptitude. After eight years of watching Dubya and thinking “THIS is the guy they backed over me,” he finally gets his turn, and it turns out to be Obama’s moment, not his. I think the whole experience actually pushed him over the edge. He’s not the same guy. It IS a sad story, but it doesn’t excuse the ongoing temper tantrum that’s defined his career ever since.

  37. Megan says:

    free speech is not in danger, GQ let he speak, it was printed, and he was allowed a clarifying statement.

    Here is the thing with free speech, you can say what you want but there are consequences to those statements. She has come out against and said horrible things about people that support LGBT rights, she has that right and I would fight like hell if someone took it away from her even if I think her comments are disgusting, bigoted and sad. She has the right to say them and I have the right to tell her she is wrong.

    That is how free speech works. It is very simple.

  38. Addie says:

    Holy comoli, she looks like Janice Dickenson in the last shot.

  39. Kate says:

    This idiot needs to understand that the First Amendment protects individuals from state action. It does not protect individuals from being disciplined by their private employers when they make comments that reflect negatively on that employer. The network that airs their show has the right to suspend this guy for making racist and homophobic statements. He had the right to voice his opinions, he voiced those opinions, the government is not persecuting him in any way for those opinions, and his employer, and no doubt the companies that finance his show through their advertizing dollars, have wisely decided that it is not in their interest to be seen supporting racist and bigoted statements, which is also their right. Sarah Palin cannot possibly take an oath to be President or Vice President and uphold the Constitution if she cannot even understand the Consttitution.

  40. Cel says:

    I don’t think she’s dumb and I generally have liked a lot about her. Remember when President Obama made some off color remarks a out the Special Olympics? This seems similar only worse. These weren’t off the cuff remarks but actual ugly positions held by someone with influence (it pains me to think of someone dressed like that like that having large scale influence). Imagine also if there was such a huge problem with suicide, homelessness, and depression among people who participate in the special Olympics.

    A&E can use their influence and money how they see fit. Isn’t that largely what capitalism is about?

  41. Grant says:

    She looks terrible, like an emaciated Shania Twain.

  42. insomniac says:

    Just because it apparently can’t be said enough, “Free Speech” does NOT mean “I get to say whatever I want without any consequences or disagreement or else it’s totally CENSORSHIP.” And I can’t help but notice that Palin has no trouble with people being suspended or fired when they say something against her.

  43. Susan says:

    Sarah Palin, once again demonstrating her ignorance of how this right actually works since “free speech” is a protected right from government censorship, not a right to push your bigoted views onto others and then expecting the general public to react favorably.

    America is great like that though, because instead of addressing actual social issues, these people can get on their hobby horses and circle jerk each other off into the sunset.

  44. Skye says:

    This woman cracks me up (or she would, if she weren’t real). I caught a clip of her on O’Reilly when she made her comment about stopping the Reagan worship. She’s such a vapid, wind-up talking-points toy. Between her ignorance, lack of critical thinking abilities, and need for attention, I’m betting she will literally parrot back anything you say to her, if you just use the appropriate voice inflection and body language.

  45. J McCain says:

    To my fellow Americans, I am so sorry…..

    - John McCain

  46. lady karinsky says:

    “Sarah Palin has some thoughts”

    stop there and you’re lying.

  47. glaugh says:

    I’ve been willfully ignoring her existence, and I will continue to do so. I find her to be an awful person.

  48. Decloo says:

    If there’s anyone out there who has yet to see “Game Change” with Julianne Moore, I really urge you to do so. It’s so scary that it could be a freaking horror movie. You will not believe the sh*t that is purported to have happened during that campaign.

  49. Anon says:

    Dang, I thought reality wash-up Kate Gosselin couldn’t out class anyone, till I seen that bottom picture of skinny Sarah. Just wow, meth-y.

  50. Anne says:

    I would like to turn around and ask Ms. Palin if she thought it was a ‘free speech’ issue when the Dixie Chicks expressed their contempt for (then) President Bush, and almost every radio station in the South US (and many, many all over the country) stopped playing their music–all kinds of Republicans boycotted them–would Palin have defended them at the time?
    I like the Dixie Chicks and I never stopped listening to them, but they, too, at that time, played the ‘free speech’ card: but, like this Duck Dynasty guy, the truth is that they choose to express opinions that offended their core demographic audience and suffered the consequences of public and corporate censure.
    And shall we even talk about Paula Deen…?

  51. mk says:

    Why are we only focusing on the homophobia? He wasn’t just homophobic in the interview, he was also insensitive to black people. Saying that pre-entitlement, pre-welfare, black people were happy?

    • The Girl Who Would Be King Of The Popes says:

      Good point. The stuff he said about black people, while succinct was just as horrible because he completely fabricated a history in which it was categorically better for black people because they didn’t have to addle their little minds with things they can’t handle, like agency and self-determination and they knew it, too. I’m not lessening what he said about gay people and non-Christians even a little bit because it was brain-crampingly stupid, but you know, I’m thinking about everyone and that part seems to getting the least attention in general (not that I’m surprised).

      That Confederfreak thinks he was working with Uncle Remus and is one of many who seems to believe that the eternal foe–Welfare Queen is weakening the very foundation of whatever kind of country he thinks he’s in. As if his white guy insulation would’ve recognized the mistreatment or given a flying fuck if he paid attention to what was around him.

      Hard done by isn’t the same thing as experiencing discrimination and having to deal with a lot of crap isn’t the same thing as living under bigotry, but people like him can’t get out of their own heads for long enough to understand or care about the difference.

      That’s probably why you hear ‘race card’ so often, because people in a place of relative privilege take the greivances that people who don’t have it have and take things that didn’t happen to them persoanlly and suddenly the one who who wasn’t hurt is somehow the offended party. Phil Robertson has amenities we can scarcely imagine but his whole world is under attack because those shiftness black people won’t step correct–and that’s how we know that he’s the real victim, when someone dares to challenge his perception. I can’t stand that crap, when the top of the heap claims persecution and admonishes the ones underfoot for daring to make him slightly uncomfortable as if the bad stuff is happening to him.

      Now that’s privilege, when other people’s struggles are not their own but yours to own and manipulate to make yourself like hero and sinned against. Hell, take them out of the conversation altogether, you know they’re just going to bring up their drug of choice (racism) again. They love blaming people, it’s like entitlement to them.

      Whatever to him and that whole mode of thinking. I’m surprised the human dentist drill Mater Pater didn’t throw in a few ‘PC’s for good measure. That’s what it called when people who aren’t just like try to defend themselves against insults. Right?

  52. Joh says:

    Merry Chrizmuz Sarah
    You are starting to look like Wayland towers Madame

  53. It is so nice to read a comment board about a controversial subject and find nothing but well informed posters, respect from both sides and not a personal attack in sight. Kudos, Celebitchy. I loves ya.

  54. Sue says:

    I agree that his comments were rude and inappropriate. However, freedom of speech is just that we are allowed to say what we want. I am so thankful that I live in a country like this. The question then is employment. Does an employer have the right to fire you if you do no believe the same way what that they do and you speak up about it? For example if you are a nurse and you believe that homosexual couples should be allowed to be married and you speak openly about it but you work in a Catholic Hospital that disagrees with this should they be allowed to fire you? Does your ability to be employed depend on what you say? Is that true freedom? Or are we gagging people with the threat of a job? Kind of say what we want you to say or you are fired? Is that true freedom? How much does an employer have control over? Would we really just lose freedom of speech if everyone would be afraid they would be fired if they said what they really thought? I think that some countries we believe to not have freedom of speech believe they do. The problem becomes that if they don’t say what the majority wants them to cannot work. Why do you think that in some countries they all say the same things – when we know they don’t believe it. Fear. You say the wrong thing you don’t work. It is kind of a slippery slop.

    • Londerland says:

      It’s not purely an issue of free speech, but of someone making a hostile environment in the workplace. Any employer has to concern itself with the welfare of its staff and the needs of it’s customers. If you have one employee proudly spewing hate speech, are you going to tell every other employee to grit their teeth and respect the bigot’s right to free speech? If he’s alienating your customers with his bigotry, you’d fire him – not because you’re a fascist but because he’s not doing his job.

      • Sue says:

        I say let people say what they want – their jobs should not depend on it. Because if they do – we are not really free at at all.

      • Londerland says:

        “I say let people say what they want – their jobs should not depend on it. Because if they do – we are not really free at at all.”

        @Sue (sorry, it won’t let me reply directly) – so anyone, in any job, should be able to say anything they want under the protection of free speech? By that logic, a guy serving at McDonalds could say, “here’s your order, you ugly bitch”. The guy serving in my local bakery could say, “you sure you need this doughnut? You’re fat enough.” The doctor could conclude my gynaecology exam by saying “have a nice day, you slut”. A schoolteacher could start her class with the greeting, “good morning, you spoiled little sh*ts!” Would that be acceptable? Of course not. We place limits on free speech in certain situations. Some jobs require us to bite our tongues – to get along with other people, to properly serve the customers.

        And what about the freedom of other employees – gay employees, black employees – to go to their jobs and not be harassed by some racist, homophobic jackass? Not to be afraid the whole time because of the poisonous hatred they were being subjected to under the guise of free speech?

  55. Sue says:

    Lunederland: So true – so then who gets to decide what can be said and what cannot be said. The employer? My niece was once told that if she cut her hair she would be fired (she worked at a restaurant at a golf course). Does the employer have that right? Did you know that Bill Maher called Christians “herpes” and Muslims “cancer” on air once. It seemed no one had a problem with this. His employer thought it was fine so it was all good. So if your employer decides what you can and cannot say it that freedom? I think that lots of women feel threatened today going to work – who is making sure this doesn’t happen?

    • neelyo says:

      Yes Sue, the employer. I’m sure the Duck Dynasty cast probably has a morals clause in their contract and an interview like the one in GQ could be seen as a violation of said contract.

      Bill Maher works for HBO. They don’t have sponsors like A & E, that’s the difference there.

      And if your employer decides what you can and cannot say and you don’t like it, then you quit. There’s your freedom.

      And I don’t know what you’re referring to in your last sentence because it’s so vague.

    • cr says:

      Your niece’s employer may indeed have that right. If she felt they were in the wrong, did she consult with an employment/labor attorney?

      But you keep using the word ‘freedom’, as if it is a catch-all for all employment issues. It isn’t.

      Being fired/suspended for being a public asshole isn’t a violation of Phil Robertson’s freedoms.

  56. TG says:

    @Doofus- I couldn’t reply to your comment about the white male privilege but I agree with you 100%. Didn’t Bill O’Reilly pretty much state your case after this last election? He said something about it not being a traditional America anymore. Translation: white America. I think that is one reason Ole Mittens was taken by surprise and shattered after the election. I think he thought it was God ordained that he would end up in the “White House”. I really cannot stand Mittens. There was something sinister about him. He wouldn’t release his tax returns for one. Also I watched that video CNN did on his life and he talked about his missionary life in France and it was all a numbers game for him about how many people he could sign up to the church. There was no mention about sharing the Word of God it was all about his competitiveness to beat the numbers goal. That was chilling to me.

    • doofus says:

      TG – YES!! I remember O’Reilly making that comment and thinking at the time “gee, what a not-so-thinly veiled comment”. And it goes along with that “no longer getting special treatment = being persecuted” idea.

      Mitt scared me, too. When I heard that story about him chasing down that kid at boarding school and cutting his hair, I got chills. To me, that was indicative of who he was as a person. Sinister is a good word for it.

  57. homegrrrral says:

    It’s a shame the right is hijacked by hateful people like Palin and papa duckman. Today I went to a sort of cowboy store to purchase gift certificates and there were these cheesy DD t shirts on display. They have every right to display their morals, and I have every right to walk out which I did, empty handed. 1st amendment rights work both ways; I will phone the manager to explain why I didn’t make this annual purchase.

  58. hatekyle says:

    I don’t think that majority found Phil’s comment bigoted but that’s your opinion. And Sarah Palin has the right to state her opinion as well.

    • doofus says:

      she does, and since her opinion is based on a incorrect interpretation of the Constitution, we have the right to ridicule her for it.

      Ain’t freedom of speech awesome?

    • allheavens says:

      Those who didn’t find Robertson’s comments bigoted are themselves bigots., straight up, no chaser.

      Freedom of speech does not give one the right to spew hate without consequence and that includes termination of employment

      As an employer if you don’t like my conditions of employment then you are “free” to find employment elsewhere or file suit if you think you have a case.

      Sarah can open her piehole as often as she likes and anyone can ridicule her for her ill-informed, famewhoring vapidness.

  59. Maria says:

    Palin is going to keep this up and people in Alaska who’ve got the goods on her and her husband are finally going to start spilling the beans.

  60. butu says:

    Thank you for writing this. I have just about had it with people crying over this bigots freedom of speech rights being trampled. If anything why should we be tolerant of his horse hooey when he is intolerant of a vast majority of groups.