Hate Speech: A response

I don’t think that Terry has any obligation to “address” his brother’s statements.
I do think that Terry has an obligation to take responsibility for what HE says. Or rather for what he asks. To ask a series of questions that imply certain answers and then say you were “only asking questions” is dishonest. It’s disingenuous.

No, of course you love your bro. But should you be shilling for him? I think your pimping of his blog and promotion of the controversy that he ginned up is what people object to.
I know it certainly diminished your credibility in my eyes. You are the one who made it personal by shilling for your brother’s blog.

It’s weally nice that you wuv your brother and all, but if you’re honest with yourself, you can’t deny that he’s a profoundly stupid man, with right-wing beliefs which no sane people can defend.
And I don’t for a minute buy your laughable claim that you didn’t know that he was writing about Marcotte. Not all of us are as stupid as Rick. Don’t insult our intelligence by lying to us. We can count on Bush and those who carry his water, like Rick, to do that.

Is there another Moran brother? Because between Rick’s Sonny and your Fredo, the family is seriously in need of a Michael.
Actually, what matters about this whole thing is not whether you’re taking orders from Rick. What matters is that your story is clearly, obviously, driven by the rantings of Right Blogistan in general (your brother’s blog is certainly well named!). It didn’t occur to you to think about whether such incivility was more widespread until later. And you still haven’t mentioned McCain’s blogger Patrick Hynes.

The sad tale of John Edwards (now former) bloggers

As I mentioned briefly in my last post, the mega-watt hot issue the last couple of days in the blogosphere has been the story about two popular left-wing bloggers that the John Edwards campaign hired as his official bloggers. Several we…

Terry: Is a pig’s ass pork? (I guess you don’t have ALL the great questions.)

Terry,
I don’t agree with your positions or reporting most of the time, but God Bless you for your comments and love for your brother, it really touched me. A Conservative American Cop/Marine.

Here’s a post from a prominent liberal blog (Crooks and Liars) addressing the issue of right wing hypocrisy when it comes to lecturing left-wing bloggers on civility:
Congratulations to all C&L’ers who e-mailed the right-wing bloggers we named in this post, demanding to know why they were so conspicuously silent about Ann Coulter’s repugnant remarks at the Conservative Political Action Conference this past week. Your e-mails forced Michelle Malkin, Jonah Goldberg and Kathryn Jean Lopez to end their silence and acknowledge that one of the most influential pro-Bush pundits spewed some truly deranged hate-mongering as part of her featured speech at the most significant conservative event of the year (other speakers including Dick Cheney, Bill Frist, Ken Mehlman, George Allen and Newt Gingrich – the heart and soul of the Republican Party).
And credit where it’s due – while Goldberg’s condemnation was whiny, half-hearted and reluctant, and Lopez’s was non-existent (she asks why we don’t just ignore Coulter without realizing that Coulter was the featured speaker at the most prestigious conservative event of the year and is one of the country’s most prominent pro-Bush pundits with a huge GOP following), Malkin’s denunciation of Coulter and her remarks is fairly straightforward and clear (although Coulter’s purpose is hardly “nothing more than (to) get a cheap laugh” – when she urged violence against “ragheads,” she received a “boisterous ovation” from the crowd).
And, of course, the question remains: if Coulter’s views are so repugnant and extreme, why does she continue to play such a prominent role in the “conservative” movement and have such a large GOP following?
Still silent, however, are the usually talkative and opinionated Instapundit, Powerline’s John Hinderaker, and Hugh Hewitt. The silence is particularly inexcusable for Instapundit, not just because he was a featured speaker at the same Conference along with Coulter (although that is true), and not just because he loves to hold himself out as a responsible, mainstream Bush-lover who disassociates himself from the Right-wing fringe (although he does hold himself out as that). Instead, his silence is so deafening and inexcusable because he frequently and self-righteously demands that Democrats step up and condemn wholly irrelevant “fringe leftists,” even when (as is not the case for Reynolds and Coulter here) the Democrats in questions have nothing to do with such figures and have no connection to them.
Here, for instance, is Reynolds sermonizing to Democrats on their obligation to condemn the obscure and inconsequential Ward Churchill:
It’s just that the right has done a better job of muzzling and marginalizing its idiots, while the Left has embraced them. . .
I keep hearing that there’s a silent majority on the Left that doesn’t agree with these things. I keep waiting for it to stop being silent.
So Glenn Reynolds appears at the same event as a woman who stands up and urges violence against “ragheads,” terrorist attacks on Supreme Court Justices, and the assassination of a former President – and then he says nothing afterwards to denounce or condemn those comments. But Democrats who never met or even heard of Ward Churchill, never attended an event with him, never had anything to do with him – why, all of them have an obligation to stand up and denounce him. And unlike Ann Coulter, Ward Churchill isn’t being invited to the most important political events of the year, doesn’t have a huge following (or a following at all) on the Left, and isn’t selling hateful best-selling screeds.
Why is Professor Reynolds so silent about his co-speaker’s hateful and violence-advocating rants?
Why does Professor Reynolds sermonize to Democrats that they should “muzzle and marginalize their idiots” why he hides in the corner, afraid to condemn Ann Coulter’s remarks, even though she’s one of the most influential pundits in his Party and received a boisterous ovation from his fellow “conservatives” when she urged violence against “ragheads”?
Why would Professor Reynolds participate in an event that sponsors a speech urging violence against Muslims and the domestic political opponents of Republicans?
You can ask him these questions and others here: Pundit@Instapundit.com.
–posted by Glenn Greenwald

Way to go with the inflammatory headline and then the backpeddle.
“It should ALSO be mentioned that Coulter’s comments led to her firing from National Review.
So dealing with one’s own words is already done on the right.
-=Mike
Except that Edwards didn’t make the remarks. The remarks were made on a blog that had nothing to do with Edwards. Not the same thing at all.

Here is an excellent post on this topic from a prominent liberal blog (C&L):
The Criminally Talented Mr. Nelson
By: Cliff Schecter @ 4:45 PM – PST
You may have been following the recent “controversy” engulfing the Edwards Campaign that has made it’s way into the media, when the MSM are not too busy covering cases of homicidal astronauts wearing adult diapers for jaunts through southern states.
If not, all you need to know is that two bloggers working for John Edwards, Amanda Marcotte and Melissa McEwan, may be fired (information is still a bit sketchy right now) because right-wing morons like Michelle Malkin have been crying ovuh bad wanguage the two used, in blog posts they wrote before working for Edwards.
B-O-O-H-O-O.
The fact that CNN and the NY Times would pay any attention to a woman whose reasoning in her books/columns falls somewhere between My Pet Goat and Millie’s Book is bad enough. Yet, worse even, is that the press would try to turn “bad language” into a controversy (or now it’s anti-Catholic ideas I hear…um, Bob Jones anyone?) and ignore a McCain campaign manager who consorts with criminals and approved the virulently racist ads used against Harold Ford by the NRSC in 2006.
That would be Terry Nelson. As head of the NRSC’s independent expenditure unit in 2006, Nelson is the one who approved the “call me” race-baiting ad that played on fears of miscegenation, which led those liberals at Wal-Mart to fire his firm they found it so offensive.
Nelson was an unindicted co-conspirator of Tom DeLay’s in his money laundering scheme in Texas (the TRMPAC scandal), and was forced to testify in the matter. He was also in the middle of Republican efforts to jam phones in New Hampshire in 2002, to hamper the Democratic GOTV effort in a tight senate race. He was James Tobin’s boss at the RNC, a man who was eventually convicted of this crime. Nothing fishy there.
So let me try and understand this. John Edwards should have to fire two woman because they used a few swear words, but John McCain’s hiring a man who’s been involved in multiple scandals that led to indictments and convictions–not to mention his penchant for racist ads–is hunky dory. And the former is somehow a legitimate story for the media to swarm upon, but not the latter?
Wow, that’s some liberal media out there.
For more on this and other stories, go to cliffschecter.com

“the Republican party and candidates have been hiring and pandering to much more vitriolic bloggers?”
Give examples please. Thanks.
“Doesn’t this interest you at all– not that the Republicans hire these guys, or even that ABC wuvs Glenn Beck with a scary passion. Hey, free speech. I’m okay with it. But aren’t you at all curious as to why you managed to ignore all that for so long– ignore very prominent speakers on the right canoodling with the Repubs– and then, suddenly, you decide that this little incident must, must, must be broadcast with a flaming headline?”
Provide examples again, please. All you’re doing is thrusting out innuendo and smears.
What Amanda wrote is on the record. If you wish to defend it, knock yourself out.
Then remind us of how the Democratic Party is all about inclusion.
“Just look back– see how many kerfluffles have sprung up in the past decade, almost all involving Democrats– and spread with a rapidity that rivals the flu virus.”
Like a web site with literally no history breaking the Foley story? Or forged TANG memos? Or a story about missing ammo from Iraq? Or how Rove leaked Plame’s name? Or that whole Guckert thing?
Let me guess — THOSE weren’t what you were referring to.
“Except that Edwards didn’t make the remarks. The remarks were made on a blog that had nothing to do with Edwards. Not the same thing at all. ”
Edwards made the hire. He either 1) does not care one tiny iota about uniting squat, 2) doesn’t vet AT ALL people he hires, or 3) completely agrees with her completely insane claims.
And then people keep mentioning Rush, Coulter, and Malkin who do not approach her level NOR are they employed by campaigns.
But, hey, keep blaming Bush for dividing the country while you condemn Terry Moran for not hating HIS BROTHER.
It’s amazing what masks get pulled off when people think they have power.
-=Mike

August,
Please keep in mind that the rest of the world isn’t as b#t$&it crazy as you & the nutroots, so don’t expect it to cater to your every crackpot question.

“I find it incredible and insulting that you would compare “n-word” and blood libel degrees of racism and anti-Semitism with the quotes you’ve drawn out of Marcotte’s writing.”
Nobody did.
But when compared to what is claimed to be hate speech, Amanda’s writings MORE than qualifies.
Well, if she were a conservative it would to you.
“I think it’s easy for a white man who has never actually experienced racism and anti-Semitism to make such deeply flawed comparisons that fail to take into account any power differentials that may be at play.”
Back to the “only white men can be racists” mentality, eh? It’s an intellectual cop-out and you are well aware of that.
“Do you not realize that there is a vast gulf of difference between a) hateful speech towards an oppressed, disenfranchised minority, motivated simply by prejudice; and b) angry, even vulgar and mocking speech over tremendously powerful institutions (like the Catholic Church, the Republican party, and fundamentalist Christianity), which Marcotte (and I) believe are active in discriminating against and oppressing other groups of people, in this specific case, women?”
Again, it’s not “hate speech” if you do it. We got the message. It makes you a raging hypocrite, but I don’t suppose that is a concern.
Basically, it’s OK to use hate speech against those you disagree with and only you can define who is a group worthy of hatred.
“And, to answer your question about whether it is “‘okay’ to trash Catholicism–but not Islam?” – again, these are apples and oranges. When Marcotte “trashes” the Catholic church, she is criticizing a powerful, centralized institution whose members wield significant political clout (as demonstrated by this whole fiasco), and who use attempt to use that clout to pressure politicians into severely limiting reproductive rights.”
And Islam DOESN’T?
Are you SERIOUSLY going to make that claim?
And, opposing your views means that you deserve hate, huh?
Nice of you to hold a firm line on opposition to hate speech.
-=Mike

>
Right, cause we know that fighting for women’s rights is the top priority of Al Qaeda.

Does ABC condone hate speech?
Yes. They hired Glenn Beck

Maybe the answer is this: abolish political parties. They are an institution (like the electoral college) that has outlived it’s usefulness, and now only seems to exist to feed into the polarization of America. By reading all of your wonderful comments, bloggers, it looks like many of you throw Democrat and Republican around like the n-word (and yes, I do compare them, after all they’re degrees of hatred when used as insults).
I am nominally a Republican, only because I find slightly more of their views closer to mine. But when I read the sewage that some of you throw around, it disgusts me and makes me disavow ALL labels. Therefore, I am not a democrat or republican, not a liberal or conservative, just an American. And I’ll ignore the bloggers and media as slightly stupid (albeit sometimes lovable) children and listen to the candidates – and then vote on what I hear from them.
Moran, though is right in saying, “Can’t we all please just get along?”

Under T Moran’s leadership, ABC news is trying hard to become Fox-lite. Edwards’ blogger is much less objectional than people like Ann Coulter and Glen Beck whom ABC regularly allows to spew their lying, hate-filled invectives to a national audience. ABC is also quick to parrot unattributed, false stories about Dems (Polosi plane, Obama madrasa eg)planted by the moonie press while ignoring real malfeasance and corruption by Repugs. Shame on ABC.
I live in the mountains with limited TV reception. ABC is the local affiliate. I refuse to watch this station’s national news because of the obvious and inaccurate right-wing slant. Thank G0od for the Bloggs.

“Thanks to all who have weighed in on the issue of John Edwards’ “blogmaster” Amanda Marcotte. All voices and views are welcome here. The whole point of “Pushback” is to provoke a discussion, to take a look at the news and start talking about it.”
You have got a lot to learn about this medium.
You were taken to task yesterday largely for interposing what honest people on the left, right and middle would deem silly, if not stupid rhetorical questions, apparently under the guise of provoking a discussion. (e.g., “If a Republican candidate teamed up with a right-wing blogger who spewed this kind of venom, how would people react?”)
Your response to the din, however, is vintage Tony Snow. Thanks for racing to bottom to avoid and obfuscate the issue you raised. Your abject failure to inquire whether Mr. McCain condones hate speech by virtue of persons he has teamed with is duly noted.
If you want to provoke discussion, do your job. If you merely post talking points, you will get hammered.

*****
A very simple question to Terry.. have you done any similar investigation of whether McCain/Guliani/Romney/Brownback campaigns have hired anyone in ANY role that has made “hateful” comments in their past.
If you have done this investigation what did you find out?
If not, why have not you done this investigation since you thought it important enough to write about in a negative tone on your blog??
Hope you answer this question.
*****

“Just reading the comments on this thread it is so obvious that what passes for “liberalism” these days is all hate, all bile, all venom, all day every day”
Agreed. And you would be surprised how many are federal employees surfing the nutroots on taxpayer time. I know a GS15 at DOL who spends his entire work day surfing the net.
TERRY: Please don’t attribute the amount of negative responses or hateful vitrol here as anyting indicative of public opinion. Most of your lefty commenters are online activists from the DU/Kos fever swamps.
You won’t see many mainstream peeps commentng here because its a waste of their time – seriously, why would I waste my time arguing with trolls who insist the CBS forgeries were a Rove op?
Anyways, please try to stay objective and above all the vitrol here. Not that I’m coming back to the networks anytime soon, but I HAVE noticed that of the left-biased MSM, ABC and WaPo are at least trying to provide more objective reporting. Good luck to you.

“So let me try and understand this. John Edwards should have to fire two woman because they used a few swear words”
Strawman. Marcotte has a pattern & history of bigotry towards Catholics and Southerners. Apparently, Edwards beleives its unwise to antagonize those voters…
Moot point anyway. Edwards never had a real shot at POTUS. He’s just a pretty boy with good hair. Hillary will maul him in the primary.

Dear Lord, Mr. Moran. I feel for you. What it must do to you, reading these howls of hate. But I did read recently that hate is now fashionable, and exhibiting your hatred of “the evil one”, whoever that might be, is held to be an admirable quality in liberals. We really are in a post-Christian world, aren’t we?

Mikesc,
Are you employed, sir. You have commented at least a dozen times to these two posts. Don’t you have anything better to do than troll an abc news blog and feebly try to discredit other posters. Bush league stuff, laughable.
-Da Jesus Quintana

Jesus, comparing white-supremacist and eliminationist rhetoric to the writings of Marcotte et al…
And conveniently ignoring in your contrived self-justification the far worse hate-filled rantings of McCain’s bloggers…
Have you no sense of decency, or are you truly your brother’s brother?

Doug:
You are a ninny. To take an allusion to the Wizard of Oz and make it into my wishing death on Olberman is loony.
Get a grip kid. Take a Xanax and breathe into a paper bag.

“I challenge anyone to find a Liberal blogger calling for the death or imprisonment of Conservatives for their political views, like the right has done countless times.”
Chris Hedges has called for the silencing of Christians.
Read DemocraticUnderground and get some lovely eliminationist rhetoric.
“Thanks for racing to bottom to avoid and obfuscate the issue you raised. Your abject failure to inquire whether Mr. McCain condones hate speech by virtue of persons he has teamed with is duly noted.”
At some point, the proof of the hate speech will be presented, right?
“Are you employed, sir.”
Yup.
“You have commented at least a dozen times to these two posts.”
You need to learn to count more accurately.
“Don’t you have anything better to do than troll an abc news blog and feebly try to discredit other posters. Bush league stuff, laughable.”
Well, I admittedly don’t have the ability to troll as you do.
Notice I’m posting thoughts while you’re obsessing over me? While I am admittedly honored by your infatuation with me, I can assure you, it is not a mutual thing.
“And conveniently ignoring in your contrived self-justification the far worse hate-filled rantings of McCain’s bloggers…”
A single example of this would be peachy.
Notice that examples of Amanda’s work has been cited.
“And will due respect, your brother says some pretty nasty things. Here he is wishing death upon Keith Olbermann”
Watching him make a fool of himself on television is not a wish for his death.
But, yeah, that’s every inch as bad as what Amanda wrote, huh? Same thing.
-=Mike

There’s nobody anywhere near mainstream on the center or on the left who spouts the kind of violent eliminationist rhetoric that you see on a regular basis from right-wing media figures like Michael Savage, Glenn Beck, Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, etc. And if you go to the right-wing blogs like LGF it really gets scary… Even at the oh-so-polite RedState moderators day-dream about the mass-murder of liberals. Timothy McVeigh and the White Citizen’s Council have become the mainstay of the conservative movement and of the Republic Party — and our media has happily accepted (even encouraged) their ilk as part of normal, acceptable discourse. Our traditional media are all turning into Radio Mille Colines.
A Glenn Beck sampler:
http://achorn.blogspot.com/2007/01/glenn-beck-boycott-faq.html
RedState civility:
http://patriotboy.blogspot.com/2006_03_19_patriotboy_archive.html

Terry — care to comment on this from Michelle Malkin’s own hire, Allahpundit?
“Do Catholics really believe they are eating Christ when they take the host? Allah knows that your priests have a taste for flesh –- the younger the better, it seems -– but this is ridiculous. And you have the gall to mock Muslims for believing that Satan lives in their nostrils at night? Allah will admit that we have our eccentric beliefs like any other faith, but at least cannibalism is not part of the core curriculum. Stop chewing on Jesus, you ghoulish f*cks.”
http://www.liberalavenger.com/2007/02/08/malkins-allahpundit-catholic-hater/
And are you going to give the same prominence to Hynes’ writings (and history of dirty tricks and ties to corruption) and keep talking about it until the McCain campaign is forced to address it? No? What does that say about you and about ABC? That you have become for all practical purposes a conservative hack, even if you’d rather not think of yourself that way?
Some samples from Hynes:
“John McCain is a contemptable [sic] human being. He makes my stomach churn and my bowels clench.”
“Why is Chelsea Clinton so ugly? Because her father is Janet Reno.”
http://mediamatters.org/items/200702070007

Terry,
I respect your intellectual honesty and reporting style.
You actually seem more like a Libertarian to me and I respect that.
You are one of the best reporters in America and report the facts without a bias to the right or left.
Personally I believe you do lean slightly to the left, but it doesn’t reflect in your reporting.
Kudos on your honesty and love for your brother.
My brother and I have the same dynamic, but I belive the disagreements you and your brother, Rick, had have made you both better informed than people how only listen to Conservative pundits or Liberal pundits.
Much respect…

It’s not really Terry’s fault. He’s grown up in a age of Lazy Journalism.
You see Terry probably graduated from college with a degree in journalism. As such, he doesn’t really know how to talk to real people. He’s never held a job before where you get your hands dirty. He’s afraid to get in his car, drive across town and take notes on a real story. See, that’d be work, and they didn’t teach him that in college.
So he sits by his computer all day waiting for an email, or the phone to ring with some juicy story that he can write about and sound all edumicated and such.
So when his brother Ricky called him the other day to let him know about this big blogger controversy with Edwards, he was all raring to go because nobody else had called.
Or maybe it wasn’t Ricky. It might have been Scooter Libby for all we know, and perhaps Libby also contacted Ricky and his bud Malkin.
Regardless, what we do know is that this isn’t a story Terry uncovered. He didn’t provide any original thought, any original details, any original analysis. He just parroted what he was told in that phone call.
Quick solution: If you don’t want to be accused of being a shill.
Don’t be a shill.
And one last thing, if you are going to spend your days distorting others words and calling them names. Don’t spend the next day whining about how everybody else is distorting your words and calling you names.
It just sounds pathetic.

Wait… Rick Moran doesn’t think the Wicked Witch of the West died? Wow, it’s going to be fun watching Terry try to defend that. Oh wait, that’s right, he doesn’t need a reason. Well that’s good, because he wouldn’t be able to find any in Rick’s posts, either.

Good point, Patrick. Attacks by Democrats on President Bush are every bit as pernicious and dangerous as attacks on Lincoln were, too.

Terry, I disagree with your views most of the time, but I applaud your allegiance to your brother.
I find it very interesting that most conservatives are willing to see the decency in that, but all you get from liberals is sarcasm, or just venemous hate filled criticism.
My dad, a WWII veteran, (may he RIP) was liberal. Later in his life, we avoided political discussions. But it was comforting for me to know that despite our differences, we saluted the SAME FLAG, and I was proud to salute him for his service to the country we both loved.
It is truly sad that that kind of respect, and the respect and love you have for your brother, is lost on the liberals who have posted here. I feel more pity for them than scorn.

Exclusive interview!

This is what Terry Moran misses when he refers to a “rhetorical gangsterism” he says is practiced “on both the right and the left.” The left’s “gangsterism” gets political results, because the MSM is liberal, and therefore more sympathetic to the left …

Biff:
If I was so all fired gung ho to see Olberman dead, why did I write a post calling for the resignation of the New York Post reporter who made fun of him after the anthrax incident?
http://rightwingnuthouse.com/archives/2006/09/27/i-wouldnt-wish-it-on-my-worst-enemy/
You really ought to get out more. Smell the air, enjoy the sunshine. That institution you’re sitting in is rotting your brain.

“That institution you’re sitting in is rotting your brain”
Posted by: Rick Moran
No hate speech there, no sirree.

Well said Terry. You have provided some logic and clarity above some hateful, unintelligible, and nonsensical posts in response.
Good to know there are some sensible people on both sides of the politcal spectrum and family can come before politics.

Intersting how so many people desperately want to change the subjec to anybody else: Rush, Coulter, etc. instead of addressing the foul attacks on Christians – esp. the hate speech directed at Catholics.
What they are missing here is the fact that it’s a former Democratic VP candidate, now running for Prez, who has put at least two anti-Catholic bigots on his staff.
Of course, this will help drag Edwards campaign down. But that’s Edwards problem, due his own bad judgement.
Your love for your brother is something we need to have more of in the public eye. Coming from a large family myself, I know how you can love those with whom you might disagree on a multitude of topics.
Good writing: intellectual honesty and a good summation of the points in your entry. Thank you.

I hate you all.

Jason X,
I’m no traitor, and for the record the only ‘institution’ I’ve been in was my time in university at Malmö. Also, the United States is not at war, and hasn’t been since 1947–look it up.

Setvesh wrote:
“It’s weally nice that you wuv your brother and all, but if you’re honest with yourself, you can’t deny that he’s a profoundly stupid man, with right-wing beliefs which no sane people can defend.”
Condescending, dismissive, arrogant…gee, all you left out was the profanty and then you too could be a fringe-liberal blogger extraordinaire.

I think I’ll join the “reality based” lefty crowd here.
Logical fallacy! Ad hominem! Cognitive bias! Ad hominem! Straw man! Ad hominem! False attribution! Ad hominem! Observational selection! Ad hominem! Argument by artifice! Ad hominem! Ad hominem! Ad hominem!
Good post Mr. Moran.

I linked over from Michelle Malkin’s blog. I read the excerpt there, read your entire post here, thought I’d leave comment on your solid loyalty with your brother.
GOOD FOR YOU !!
I’m glad you are giving everyone a real example of respecting people who have differing opinions. Thanks for the demonstration on real freedom of speech!

Stunning. Simply stunning. So much stupidity and ignorance in many of these comments. This blog is one of the most respectful and intelligent “liberal” blogs that I have read … and I have read many. And so many of you idiots want to turn it into a show of power, a test of loyalty, or some other tool of small, power-brokering, authoritarian-minded morons. Lighten up and see if you might allow yourself to learn something. You obviously have much to learn, and this man obviously could serve as your teacher.

“I appreciate your determination to ask the hard questions – whether you are discussing hate speech on your blog”
Because I think we can all agree that hate speech on blogs is the most important issue facing us right now, right up there with the Britney/K-Fed divorce and astronauts who wear diapers.
When are we going to see you ask the tough questions about those important issues?

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. A person is entitled to a totally stupid opinion. In the New International translation of the Christian Bible in the Book of Proverbs it is taught that “A fool finds no pleasure in understanding but delights in airing his own opinions.” (Prov. 18:2) People need to know the root of and objectively analyze why they have an opinion, and not shoot from the hip.
Free speech is not absolute in that for example you can not cry fire in a crowded theater where there is no fire or you can be held accountable if your speech incites a riot. You had better not send the White House an email saying you are going to kill the president regardless of who he or she is. The Secret Service could be knocking on your door in minutes.
That being said I like to put hate speech in a small box. I usually tend to limit it to racial intimidation or degradation, or to speech that would lead to cause physical harm to a person’s fellow man for example his or her life style.
I am a Christian and I think it is important for Christians have a thick hide. How we respond to insults and what is most overwhelmingly down right ignorance shows much as to how strong our faith is. That does not mean we can’t use our right of speech to bring issues to debate, and when all things are equal the chance of a slander, insult, or any other question of legitimate Christian faith prevailing in a fair debate is zero.
What I found to my dismay was just because Moran mentioned his brother there were so many that went after him for blood. I thought Moran was bringing up a legitimate example. It makes me wonder just how low we are willing to go to attach some grandiose “conspiracy theory” just because Moran writes a little about his brother. Let me say that family trumps a lot of hands and those that have no respect for that truly have a serious problem. Bottom feeding bloggers obsess their selves with conspiracy theories.
Regarding the bloggers that John Roberts has brought under his political umbrella, they are perfect. Remember Roberts is the man who says there are two Americas. He talks of being the man for the common man. That is the America he represents, but at the same time he is purchasing and building a multi-million dollar residence which by most any standards is nothing less than very extravagant. He is fighting his self on this thing. You could say John Roberts is two Americas.
There is no problem with Mr. Roberts including these bottom feeding, gutter-mouthed hate mongers under his campaign umbrella. Mr. Roberts speaks with eloquence. He needs to be in cahoots with that part of America whose mind and mouth are in the manure pit. That way he can for all practical purposes speak out of both sides of his mouth. After all there are two Americas, why not two John Roberts.
By the way, I totally support these bloggers in their right to blog as they do because if they can be restricted on this level so can be the Christian witnessing and preaching. We can not have our cake and eat it too.

“For centuries, sacred cows have been skewered by satirists. We will lose far more than our sense of “special sacredness” if we start calling the satire of religion “heresy.” I mean, “hate speech.”
Terry, there is NOTHING special about religion. Nothing. It is just as open for satire as anything else. This is the United States of America. You are a reporter, for God’s sake. I mean, for heaven’s sake. I mean for goodness sake. You should be all for free speech. You should be celebrating blogs. You should be quoting Lenny Bruce. You should be urging all of us to see Dogma. Not because you agree with all of them, but because you agree that satire and openness and criticism and dissent are utterly essential to our democracy.”
Spoken like a true Marxist. You’ll enjoy Cuba, comrade.
That being said I like to put hate speech in a small box. I usually tend to limit it to racial intimidation or degradation, or to speech that would lead to cause physical harm to a person’s fellow man for example his or her life style.”
Denigration of this country is the ultimate form of hate speech. It’s far worse than the example you give, of usually justifiable anti-Sodomite statements. Hatred of America is far worse than any other form of hate speech, since it is the wellspring from whence these other forms flow. And if we are ever to unite as a people and stop terrorism, we have to be strong, and stop anti-Americanism in its tracks. If that means sending Marxists, secular humanists, Sodomites, abortionists, and liberals to detainment camps to sit out the struggle with their Islamist buddies, so be it. When my way of life is at stake, I don’t have time to worry about stepping on toes or hurting some sensitivity expert’s feelings. If you’re not part of the solution, you’re part of the problem, and liberals seem proud to put themselves in the latter category.
“I am a Christian and I think it is important for Christians have a thick hide. How we respond to insults and what is most overwhelmingly down right ignorance shows much as to how strong our faith is. That does not mean we can’t use our right of speech to bring issues to debate, and when all things are equal the chance of a slander, insult, or any other question of legitimate Christian faith prevailing in a fair debate is zero.”
Sorry, I’m not going to agree with you here. Not when people are saying that Christianity is open to satire, along with America and the President of the United States. Some things are too important to allow for skewering. Mockery is the moonbats’ most potent weapon, since most of them are too afraid of guns to learn to use them. We have to disarm them of mockery, if that’s the weapon they’re going to use against us. It’s the surest way to safeguard America and American values, and if you don’t like it, take your “Christian” values and move to Canada or Cuba. I, and millions of others like me, have a nation to save and a gospel to spread.

“Thanks Jason X for making my case for me about the right using violent rhetoric.”
You belong in Gitmo, too. I pity whatever children have the misfortune to be indoctrinated in your household Marxist/Islamist ideology, “Dad.” My own parents raised me right- they taught me how to shoot a rifle, and never to let a Commie America-hater take it out of my hands without a fight. And that’s the way it still is, and that’s the way it is with me and mine. Guess what, “Dad”? Real Americans are outbreeding you traitors. Red states are in the ascendent, and when all’s said and done, you people will wish you’d let the South secede before she rose up and swallowed you whole. The Northeast and the Left Coast are the modern-day Sodom and Gomorrah, and shall face a terrible reckoning accordingly.

I am beginning to suspect that Jason X is a troll who is attempting to portray a leftist’s charicature of a right-wing zealot. Could anyone really be that far gone? It’s cartoonish.
Terry, your love and respect for your brother in spite of ideological differences is admirable and heart-warming.
John Edwards shares the same first amendment rights as the rest of us. He has the right to associate himself with saints and sinners alike, and to be judged by those who might vote for him accordingly.
I couldn’t tell you if keeping or disowning the bloggers in question would cost him more votes. I’m sure that he’d prefer the third choice of never having hired them in the first place if that were available.
Still, there is no way, in a two-year campaign cycle, for any prominent candidate to avoid stepping in it more than once. What Edwards needs to overcome the Clinton juggernaught and the Obama charm offensive is a miracle, so he’ll need to take risks and get used to a lot of vicious attacks.
If Edwards’ campaign can’t withstand a guilt-by-association hit like this one, he’ll never make it to the primaries.

“John Edwards shares the same first amendment rights as the rest of us. He has the right to associate himself with saints and sinners alike, and to be judged by those who might vote for him accordingly.”
Nobody said Edwards doesn’t have the RIGHT to hire these two.
Just that it shows that he does mind bigotry on the part of the people he employs.
It’s a fair criticism.
-=Mike

To Jason X:
People are by base nature prone to hate. This is realized all too often by the speech of a person portraying what is truly in his or her heart.
This is the reason Christ puts hate on the exact same plain as murder. The Apostle John explained it this way, “Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer: and ye know that no murderer hath eternal life abiding in him.” (I John 3:15, King James Translation)
John goes into a greater detail here saying, “He that saith he is in the light, and hateth his brother, is in darkness even until now. He that loveth his brother abideth in the light, and there is none occasion of stumbling in him. But he that hateth his brother is in darkness, and walketh in darkness, and knoweth not whither he goeth, because that darkness hath blinded his eyes.”
A person filled full of hate lives in darkness and is incapable of rational thought. That does not mean that in appropriate times Christians can not take firm stands and deal aggressively and decisively with issues of moral corruption or national security. The motivating factor here is that all should be motivated by love. Love of the Lord God Jesus Christ, love of family, and love of nation.
I read a lot of talk on these blogs and religion is brought up often, but I fail to see how what is being written is motivated by love.
Jason, I found your opinion interesting. It is certainly worthy of thought whether or not I or anyone else agrees with it. I don’t consider religion a “sacred cow”. Most people in the world are religious. Some practice what they believe. Others do not practice what they say they believe. There can even be made a case that atheism is actually a form of religion.
So who is right? There is a thought that there are many ways to Heaven and Hell (Tartarus) or in some cases non-existence. Many hold to this idea vehemently. It is rather silly though. In reality what is being argued is that “the only way to Heaven is many ways”. Think about it awhile. It does not make a bit of sense. In apologetics this is call a “self-refuting argument.”
So what is THE WAY and is it a “sacred cow”. The Lord God Jesus Christ answers the ultimate question regarding religion (present tense) in the King James translation as follows, “Thomas saith unto him, Lord, we know not whither thou goest; and how can we know the way? Jesus saith unto him, I AM THE WAY, THE TRUTH, AND THE LIFE: NO MAN COMETH UNTO THE FATHER, BUT BY ME. If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him.”
Here we have one way that trumps all others. This is a high claim. Let’s deal with the “sacred cow” issue as it pertains to Christianity.
The best authority on this issue is what Christ says about it. He covers it in the Beatitudes. The Beatitudes lay much of the foundation of Christian demeanor. He proclaims, “Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness’ sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake. REJOICE, AND BE EXCEEDING GLAD: FOR GREAT IS YOUR REWARD IN HEAVEN: for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you. (Matthew 5:10-12 King James Translation)
Christians need a thick hide and should not expect the unbelievers and the misguided believers when they make sport of Christians for it is through this “trial by fire” that exceptional blessing and eternal reward is warranted.
Jason, I hope this further explains the foundation of the argument I presented. I think in the sense as it is commonly understood Christianity is not a “sacred cow”, but rather a system of belief that survives at its best when it is reviled.

“Stunning. Simply stunning. So much stupidity and ignorance in many of these comments. This blog is one of the most respectful and intelligent “liberal” blogs that I have read … and I have read many. And so many of you idiots want to turn it into a show of power, a test of loyalty, or some other tool of small, power-brokering, authoritarian-minded morons”
You should see what they do to Althouse. I think liberalism has become a religion for the Left. Heretics are routinely burned at the stake.

Jason X
However unfounded it is apparent you have an active imagination. It is also apparent you have a limited ability to understand what you read so let me clarify.
Regarding defending myself I am trained in two forms of martial arts, Shaolin and Isshinryu. I was good before I got the training. Now I am very good.
What are the most men you have fought and prevailed? I have needed to handle two and prevailed. Done right, it takes only one strike for each.
I am a crack shot with a pistol or a rifle, but I prefer the 10 shells of 00 buck that are loaded in my 12 gauge Remington pump. It is an equalizer should a conflict come to that, God forbid. I have never had an occasion to threaten or defend with this shotgun, but there is not a person in my community that does not know if left with no choice I would exercise reasonable and necessary force to protect my family, my person, and my property.
Jason,
Let’s get real here. You want to talk big. Have you ever been under fire? I have. The bullets going by don’t sound like in the movies. How do I react? I never even flinch. General McArthur said, “A man that is afraid to die is not fit to live.”
I was raised on a dairy farm and I don’t care one bit to get down in the manure pit you enjoy so much and tangle. I already know what you smell like, and it is not going to bother me. By the way, if you handle 7,000 80 lbs. bales of hay four times each, it makes a person mighty strong. You are not dealing with a 90 pound weakling.
I worked in the East Kentucky coal fields for years. Some of the men I came to know had killed. It was and still is in some places not a place for the faint of heart. I know what tough men are and you are no tough man. You blow off too much.
I have been around people like you all my life. They talk big and tough, but when it comes to where the rubber meets the road, they are nothing but yellow bellied cowards. One of the reasons I happened to be around such men in my work is because I have the reputation to always be able to handle them with no exceptions.
Not so long ago I had a man who weighed about 300 lbs. draw his fist back to hit me. He talked big and tough, but when he saw I had absolutely no concern as to what he was doing, he backed off without my even saying a word. It was like a multiple choice quiz to me: Do I cut him off at the knees? Do I break an arm? Do I give him a really bad headache? Or, do I really put the fear of God in him? Or do I use one of a dozen other techniques? All he had working for him was one ill advised attempt to hit me.
SO THERE IS YOUR TOUGH TALK JASON. I CAN DO IT TOO WHEN LEFT WITH NO CHOICE. I JUST CHOOSE NOT TO because you would be surprised how many conflicts go away if you just ignore them. My martial arts training in both styles centers on avoiding conflict and only using the techniques when left with no choice but self defense.
The Bible gives authority on how to handle a circumstance as this. The King James Translation teaches in the Book of Proverbs: “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge: but fools despise wisdom and instruction.” (Proverbs 1:7) A further study of this Wisdom Literature teaches to not argue with a fool. It is a waste of time and the fool will despise you.
By the way, it is my understanding that there is a Dr. Phil program that deals a lot with nut cases. Why don’t you contact them? You might get your 15 minutes of fame and a free psychoanalysis of your problem.
I HOPE THIS DISCOURSE DOES NOT SCREW UP THIS BLOG. I AM JUST NOT GOING TO LET THIS DOG LIE.
Isn’t America wonderful? Even an idiot like Jason X can exercise free speech and have his (DUH) say.

Biff,
A peaceful resolve is always of the greatest importance. Of all the belief systems in the world there can be none that have a greater rightful claim to it other than true Christianity.
Jason X started the rage. He only got what he dished out. No other point is being made. There is no threat and apparently you decided to not read my entire blog answer, or possibly you lack understanding.
I am a second generation understudy in Shaolin under Grand Master Sin Kwang The’ of The Shaolin Do Association (SDA) which is a group whose members are students of the Shaolin Art with various schools around the world.. He is one of the few individuals who have mastered the full system. He has a Masters in Nuclear Engineering from the University of Kentucky.
I was presented my second belt under his oversight and approval. He is one of the most gracious men I have ever met and certainly nothing less than a gentleman.
I am a second generation understudy in Isshinryu under a former Marine by the name of Harold Long. He learned Isshinryu as a Marine and was one of a handful that brought the style to the United States.
I have met him and witnessed him instruct and he was nothing short of a total gentleman.
He was one of the survivors of the Battle at the Chosin Reservoir in Korea where 30,000 primarily U.S troops engaged 70,000 Chinese troops. On the U.S. side 15,000 troops lost their lives while 40,000 Chinese did. 7,500 U.S. casualties were cold related. Night temperatures dipped to 30 degrees below zero. The Chinese just kept coming; running and crawling over layers of dead bodies of their comrades. The total force was 300,000 Chinese and 25,000 North Koreans to my best recollection. I remember as a kid I saw a movie about it.
Mr. Long and his surviving comrades were to become to be known as the “Chosin Few” or the “Chosin Frozen/Frozen Chosin”. Mr. Long upon leaving the Marine Corp took up law enforcement while building a network of schools across the United States and eventually around the world.
Both Harold Long and my personal instructor are in the Isshinryu Hall of Fame.
You can Google both “Harold Long – Isshinryu” and “Sin Kwang The’ – Shaolin Do” if you want to check it out as well as “Chosin Reservoir”.
What would I get if I Googled Biff or Jason X?
This was a time when men were men. No man is a real man if he is not also a gentleman.
Biff, you are no gentleman. I remember in elementary and high school there were these much less than intelligent boys who when they saw a conflict would try to agitate the situation into a fight for their own entertainment.
Why don’t you grow up?
Again, isn’t America wonderful?

Biff,
I’ll put in a good word on getting you exempted from Gitmo if you’ll explain to me what this lunatic ebbarn is talking about, other than him saying that he’ll kill any law enforcement official who lays a finger on him. I have to admit, though, that he’s convinced me he doesn’t belong in Guantanamo. He belongs in an asylum. Assuming he isn’t already posting from one, that is.

It appears that both bloggers have resigned.

‘This isn’t about censorship. It’s about leadership.’ – Terry Moran
Backpedal, backpedal, backpedal.
LMAO!
Don’t fall off the ledge Terry…Noooooooo!

An extremely wise man once wrote that “a person who does not hate evil cannot love virtue.” At first sight, that statement didn’t make sense to me because I had been taught never to hate anything or anyone. Over a great many years, though, that insight has proven to be one of the most beneficial truths I have ever encountered. It completely changed my life.
With that in mind, it seems perfectly natural for liberals and conservatives to hate each other as indeed they both do. Each side sees the other as being evil and themselves as being virtuous, so they have no choice but to hate each other if they have any sense of rational integrity. Only those who are completely indifferent to moral reality don’t hate evil and love virtue; and the activists on both sides of this fight are anything but indifferent to the moral issues involved in their struggle.
The heart of the problem lies in the fact that each side sees the fundamental principles of life from an entirely different perspective. It’s as though they’ve come from different planets in our universe. Therefore, everything each side says and does is a powerful contradiction of the others most cherished understanding of the great principles of human life. However, instead of dealing with the underlying world view of each side to understand it fairly and thoroughly, they would rather confine themselves to the superficialities of their disagreements. I suppose it’s more childishly fun that way. You may be perfectly sure, however, that such an approach will never solve anything or stop the mindless forms of hate currently destroying our nation.
A more in-depth approach, a philosophical approach dealing with the principles of each side’s fundamental perception of reality could enable them to apply insight and reason to the their disagreements at a very profound level. And at that level the vituperative hate speech can be greatly modified or perhaps even eliminated. Furthermore, when each side has a clear knowledge of the foundations of the other’s world view, more and more agreement and beneficial change would theoretically be possible leading to increasing benefit for both sides and our citizenry in general. Wouldn’t that be a wonderful blessing?

all political correct people hate speech and I support Limbaugh and Coultor rights to say anything they want. I find nothing wrong with speech that is offesive to the sensetive. Drive on!

I don’t think she has a base at all.

Hey you guys and gals, want to see some real hate speech? check out Mr. Ebbarn and Mr. Colin Cody on some of Mr. Moran’s other topics, like “Why is Hollywood liberal”, and “Reparations for Gitmo”, these guys make David Duke seem like Jane Fonda, now THERE is some real hate speech for you.
And while you’re at it Pat Robertson’s and Billy Graham Jr.’s televised CNN statements during the incitement of war fever for Afghanistan and Iraq show just which “God” they are really men of…
Good ol’ Patty Robertson. Just can’t get enough, advocating the assassination of Hugo Chavez…
Seriously, campaign blogwriters are not yet as dangerous as those demogogues on TV and radio, who daily feed the radicals around the world all the proof they need to inspire more suicide bombers, but they are rapidly becoming so…

The biblical references to the number 7 or 70 is partially connected to the Jews learning a new, to them, language, Greek. The language was more desirable in that it had vowels so that mispronunciation will be reduced. Those Jews living in Greek speaking parts of the world wanted their Hebrew religion and customs to continue in their new homelands. Christian references to the Seventy referred to translators and their work on the Greek Septuagint.

I think the term Hate speech should be banned and anyone that talks about it arrested just for thinking about it. Even talking about the idea of it should be a crime.
Jail all thinkers.
ALL.
(ps.. this leaves liberals out and scot free… cause they are so nice.. and havent an original effing idea in the world.)
enjoy the gulag folks.