Just a few thoughts, in brief, about the Rush incident.
Did he have the right to say what he did?
Absolutely.
Should he have said it?
Probably not.
On the other hand, do we have an obligation to speak out about issues of this nature?
I would like to think so.
Is it possible to have a rational discussion about such an issue?
Are you kidding!? Rational discourse started going the way of the dinosaur in the 1960s. So sure have we become of our own intellectual and moral superiority that we are no longer willing to give the opposition's arguments a fair assessment.
The trial of John Peter Zenger in the early 1600s reinforced the right of Americans to say whatever they wanted, as long as it was true. That should be the litmus test for the type of statements made in this incidence. If discussion of discrimination in the hiring of coaches and managers is considered to be a reasonable topic, then why not a discussion that approaches the issue from the opposite direction?
Perhaps he should have known better. Most of us, even if we had believed as he did, would not have given voice to such a belief in front of a microphone. We would have known full well the fury that it would unleash.
But that may be the central issue here. Is it really in our best interests as a nation and a people to permanently quell all negative speech?
Definitely not.
Regards, Shuckins
_____________________________ _
"Has anybody got a dime? Somebody's gotta go back and get a whole sh_tload of dimes!"