Hewitt's heated conversation with Bill Donohue over free speech and blaming the victims.

[Valin]

Hugh Hewitt Show:

 

H/T Dave Swindle

[Valin]

Transcript

[SrWoodchuck]

Transcript

 

Great interview. Thanks, @Valin.

 

This is where the rubber hits the road....between absolute rights, and government determining if you even have one, or to what degree. I've got to say, Donohue seems pretty full of himself. Being a Catholic, I've seen him work as a Catholic apologist for some time. Maybe he just wasn't prepared for Hugh Hewitt?

[Valin]

 

Transcript

 

Great interview. Thanks, @Valin.

 

This is where the rubber hits the road....between absolute rights, and government determining if you even have one, or to what degree. I've got to say, Donohue seems pretty full of himself. Being a Catholic, I've seen him work as a Catholic apologist for some time. Maybe he just wasn't prepared for Hugh Hewitt?

 

 

 

You are correct. Hugh is one of the best at this. I would not want to be in his crosshairs. Yes there is a (God Given) right to be offended, there is not a right to kill people because you are offended. I mean like you, I am offended everyday....several times...on the hour every hour.

 

 

BTW just looked and so far no one (Raymond Arroyo or any in Catholic leadership) has come out in support of Bill Donohue. I think what has happened is Bill Donohue saw a chance to get his name in the news.

[Valin]

What We Can Learn From Bill Donohue’s Stupid Comments
Matt K. Lewis
9:50 AM 01/09/2015

Yesterday, my friend and former colleague Hugh Hewitt destroyed Catholic League president Bill Donohue, over the latter’s recent statement, titled: “Muslims Are Right to Be Angry.” (The term “destroyed” is frequently bandied about in order to generate clicks, but in this case, I think it’s a fair description.)

(Snip)

So here’s the deal I’ll make with him: I’ll get around to focusing on the people who draw dirty and pictures AFTER WE GET RID OF THE PEOPLE TRYING TO KILL THOSE OF US WHO PRACTICE FREE EXPRESSION.

That’s not to say that, buried amongst the garbage, Donohue didn’t have an argument. The unfortunate thing is that he undermined an otherwise legitimate point of view. Fortunately, in the subsequent days, others have touched on this much more deftly. For example, the New York Times’ David Brooks calls Charlie Hebdo ”deliberately offensive humor,” Rod Dreher similarly avers: “No, We Are Not Charlie,” from the left, Slate notes that “Charlie Hebdo Is Heroicand Racist,” and, in an email, a conservative French friend (who emailed me privately, and, in no way, blames the victims) described Charlie Hebdo as

the most liberal and vulgar cartoon magazine you can get in France and you could imagine in the US. Anarchist, former communist, all sixty eighters (68ers for May 1968 generation). They had three main targets: policemen and military (but for a few years, most of them accepted to have the personal protection of the State), the Catholic Church and the patriots (described as retarded, racist…).

(Snip)

[Valin]

 

HH give me the name of one archbishop or cardinal who has called you up.

 

Still no answer, at least I've not found one.

[SrWoodchuck]

What We Can Learn From Bill Donohue’s Stupid Comments

Matt K. Lewis

9:50 AM 01/09/2015

 

Yesterday, my friend and former colleague Hugh Hewitt destroyed Catholic League president Bill Donohue, over the latter’s recent statement, titled: “Muslims Are Right to Be Angry.” (The term “destroyed” is frequently bandied about in order to generate clicks, but in this case, I think it’s a fair description.)

 

(Snip)

 

So here’s the deal I’ll make with him: I’ll get around to focusing on the people who draw dirty and pictures AFTER WE GET RID OF THE PEOPLE TRYING TO KILL THOSE OF US WHO PRACTICE FREE EXPRESSION.

 

That’s not to say that, buried amongst the garbage, Donohue didn’t have an argument. The unfortunate thing is that he undermined an otherwise legitimate point of view. Fortunately, in the subsequent days, others have touched on this much more deftly. For example, the New York Times’ David Brooks calls Charlie Hebdo ”deliberately offensive humor,” Rod Dreher similarly avers: “No, We Are Not Charlie,” from the left, Slate notes that “Charlie Hebdo Is Heroicand Racist,” and, in an email, a conservative French friend (who emailed me privately, and, in no way, blames the victims) described Charlie Hebdo as

the most liberal and vulgar cartoon magazine you can get in France and you could imagine in the US. Anarchist, former communist, all sixty eighters (68ers for May 1968 generation). They had three main targets: policemen and military (but for a few years, most of them accepted to have the personal protection of the State), the Catholic Church and the patriots (described as retarded, racist…).

 

(Snip)

 

@Valin

 

One difference between HH & BD....(that I also believe):

 

HH believes in the absolute God-given right, under the 1st Amendment....to post silly, stupid & even disgusting things that may make other people mad....to keep open the right that maintains our freedom; and use public expression of disdain & contempt for those that go well over the bounds of "decency"...as the societal control.

 

BD seems to have the progressive notion that we are incapable of using that societal control & need the government to issue our standards & enforce them with arbitrary punishments. That is a belief that I see quite a bit as I drive through my parish parking lot after Mass & note the Obama bumper stickers.

 

We need disgusting, silly & contemptible people to continually post their crap....and push the border of our rights...so the right can be stronger.....in case some other distasteful but necessary expression is needed to define our freedom.

 

We can then choose to ignore or castigate their choice, but still allow them to have it.

 

BTW: We believe our rights to be God-given....not granted at the whim of elite overlords.

[Valin]

@SrWoodchuck

 

putting on my libertarian hat Who decides what can be seen/heard/said and what can't? That is a real steep slippery slope, and at the bottom there is nothing good. No one deserves to be murdered for being offensive, and make no mistake a large number of these cartoons are offensive...in the extreme.

 

That said society does need guardrails things that are beyond the pale. Thing is those guardrails are getting smaller all the time. Defining deviancy down Patrick J. ‎Moynihan

[SrWoodchuck]

 

Via TheFeralIrishman

[Valin]

 

With age comes wisdom, but sometimes age shows up alone

 

[SrWoodchuck]

 

With age comes wisdom, but sometimes age shows up alone

 

 

@Valin

 

Unfortunately, Zbig spawned a yappy cretin that continues his demented creed on Morning Joe [MSLSD?]

[Valin]

 

Tarek Fatah ਤਾਰਿਕ ‏@TarekFatah

Wow! @EricMargolis says, #Paris Attack wasn't a terrorist attack. "#CharlieHebdou people were asking for trouble." https://soundcloud.com/tarek-fatah/eric-margalison-sayd-paris?utm_source=soundcloud&utm_campaign=share&utm_medium=twitter …

[SrWoodchuck]

 

Tarek Fatah ਤਾਰਿਕ ‏@TarekFatah

 

Wow! @EricMargolis says, #Paris Attack wasn't a terrorist attack. "#CharlieHebdou people were asking for trouble." https://soundcloud.com/tarek-fatah/eric-margalison-sayd-paris?utm_source=soundcloud&utm_campaign=share&utm_medium=twitter …

 

MAROON!

[Valin]

@SrWoodchuck

 

Once again I don't get it. I can't wrap my mind around this attitude.