Skip to comments.

Posted on 10/02/2001 11:13:02 AM PDT by mikeb704

The acts of terrorism have affected us all. In some big ways, and in some small ones. A couple of recent incidents suggest media personalities need to exercise more prudence than normal.

The trials and tribulations of Politically Incorrect’s Bill Maher are illustrative. I’ve never watched that program, mainly because I’ve seen Maher’s smirky presence elsewhere and couldn’t watch him for any extended time without tossing my cookies. He reminds me of the high school punk with the knowing leer that, on principle, you just want to slap silly.

On his show, Maher said that the terrorists weren’t cowards. Warming to his subject, he continued: "We have been the cowards, lobbing cruise missiles from 2,000 miles away, that’s cowardly. Staying in the airplane when it hits the building, say what you want about it, (that’s) not cowardly."

During the same program Maher muttered other idiocies such as "Religion is extremism. It’s extremist to believe in things that your rational mind knows is not true." It was his cowards’ remark, however, that got him in trouble.

Federal Express pulled its ads. Then Sears did. Several ABC affiliates stopped airing the show.

Maher found himself on the defensive, and claimed the underlying misunderstanding was his use of the first-person plural: "In no way was I ever intending, because I never think this way, to say that the men and women who defend our nation are anything but courageous and valiant."

Parsing his words. Sound like anyone familiar, maybe a recent president who was just barred from practicing before the Supreme Court? Then Maher moved into full-blown Clinton mode: "And I apologize to anyone who took it the wrong way sincerely."

Ah, yes. It wasn’t anything he said, you see. It was the people who took it the wrong way. Their mistake, but he’s such a munificent individual that he’s willing to apologize for their error. Whatta guy.

If you watch much cable news, you’ve seen Ann Coulter. With her short skirts, long hair and scathing commentary, she’s never been a shrinking violet. No matter how loudly other guests may yell, Ann outtalks ‘em. And she’s so conservative she sometimes makes me wonder if I’m a pinko.

Ann writes a syndicated column, one that until a few days ago was carried by National Review Online. In a recent piece, she modestly posited an appropriate response to the assault: "We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity."

The Cleveland Plain Dealer’s Tom Brazaitis accused her of "bloodthirsty rhetoric". This is ironic, coming from a man whose spouse, Eleanor Clift (who, thank the Lord, doesn’t sport short skirts and long hair), seems to have an affinity for a leader known for his firing squads, Fidel Castro. Mz Clift thinks that "To be a poor child in Cuba may, in many instances, be better than being a poor child in Miami, and I’m not going to condemn their lifestyle so gratuitously." How progressive, in a non-bloodthirsty rhetoric sort of way. But I digress.

National Review Online apparently thought Ann’s views were just a tad over the edge, and has now stopped including her columns on its website. So what can one do? In Ann’s case, one shows up in a friendly venue, Bill Maher’s Politically Incorrect. There she scorched her former allies with allegations of censorship. I’ve always been under the impression censorship meant government involvement, but Ann’s a lawyer and so she must know what she’s talking about. She also claimed that National Review’s editorial staff "are just girly-boys." Something tells me they won’t be carrying her material for a while.

I’m happy Sears and Federal Express stopped sponsoring Maher’s show. I’d have been happier, though, if the two advertisers had taken action after getting tens of thousands of protests from angry Americans and then decided in a deliberate, thoughtful way that they didn’t want their names tarnished by Maher’s stupidity.

I wonder if Maher had said something roughly as controversial before September 11th, if they would have dropped him so hurriedly. I wonder if National Review would have been so quick to drop Ann Coulter if the sensitivities of the country weren’t heightened by the attacks.

We’re a great Nation, and can have vigorous, spirited debate about almost every thing imaginable. We can even put up with outrageous comments from guys with smirks and gals with short skirts and long hair.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.