Phil Robertson being attacked by librals.

[bass]

I don't see anything offensive by what Phil said, he simply answered a question on what he believes in. why is that hateful? sooner or later people are going to be fed up being pushed around by the minority and its going to blow up in their face. I don't hate anyone, but I hate to be pushed around and told what I can and can't say. your thoughts?

http://video.foxnews.com/v/295095547...e-right-thing/

[RaginCajun]

Fvck A&E!

Everyone in society has a problem about what anyone says nowadays.

Too many pvssies in the world now, especially in America where you can't do anything anymore without offending someone.

I say, Tough shit, get over it!

[diesel101]

Before I say anything that everyone is going to start bashing me for I would like everybody to know I have no problem with gay people. As a matter of fact I am going to invite DSM over next time I work on my D*ck.

If I am correct and correct me if I am wrong I believe Phil didn't say anything that is not in the Bible.That whole family is very religious and the piece of $hit reporter asked him that question knew what kind of answer he was going to get.
The reporter knew that he would get more publicity by asking a question like that.
I am not saying Phil is right or wrong but lets not persecute the guy for answering truthfully(which is very uncommon these days).

[Hazard]

Here's my view.....


If you ask a question...... Don't hate the answer. If you don't like him for his view - don't watch the show then. He's entitled to his opinion just like a racist is entitled to theirs, and anyone else is entitled to their own. I hate that a big deal is being made of this.

He's not the only one and he won't be the last. He didn't say shit like the other guy about cooking people in ovens..... He also said he'd never treat anyone with disrespect for the way they are.

[diesel101]

Here's my view.....


If you ask a question...... Don't hate the answer. If you don't like him for his view - don't watch the show then. He's entitled to his opinion just like a racist is entitled to theirs, and anyone else is entitled to their own. I hate that a big deal is being made of this.

He's not the only one and he won't be the last. He didn't say shit like the other guy about cooking people in ovens..... He also said he'd never treat anyone with disrespect for the way they are.

I am sorry Haz but you are going to have to keep you're opinion to yourself, the public does not want to hear any of this
common sense you speak of.

[Dpyle]

He has every right to his opinion, but this isn't a free speech issue.

This has to do with the fact that he represents a brand, and his comments offended customers of that employer. So now he has to face the consequences of that action.

To make it easier to understand let's rephrase the situation. In your career, how long would you retain your job if you were offending a percentage of the company's clientele?

If you owned a business and an employee was making derogatory comments towards customers, how long would you continue to employ that person?

Had his comments been offensive to women, veterans, or another race would this debate still be going on? I mean freedom of speech yeah?

[Hazard]

He has every right to his opinion, but this isn't a free speech issue.

This has to do with the fact that he represents a brand, and his comments offended customers of that employer. So now he has to face the consequences of that action.

To make it easier to understand let's rephrase the situation. In your career, how long would you retain your job if you were offending a percentage of the company's clientele?

If you owned a business and an employee was making derogatory comments towards customers, how long would you continue to employ that person?

Had his comments been offensive to women, veterans, or another race would this debate still be going on? I mean freedom of speech yeah?

Strong point..... I like it. That is the issue.....

[rotty2]

He has every right to his opinion, but this isn't a free speech issue.

This has to do with the fact that he represents a brand, and his comments offended customers of that employer. So now he has to face the consequences of that action.

To make it easier to understand let's rephrase the situation. In your career, how long would you retain your job if you were offending a percentage of the company's clientele?

If you owned a business and an employee was making derogatory comments towards customers, how long would you continue to employ that person?

Had his comments been offensive to women, veterans, or another race would this debate still be going on? I mean freedom of speech yeah?

While this is true I feel the vast majority of his fan base is in line with his beliefs and this reaction on what he said is only going to strengthen
his brand

[bass]

While this is true I feel the vast majority of his fan base is in line with his believes and this reaction on what he said is only going to strengthen
his brand

excellent point!

[Bonaparte]

He has every right to his opinion, but this isn't a free speech issue.

This has to do with the fact that he represents a brand, and his comments offended customers of that employer. So now he has to face the consequences of that action.

To make it easier to understand let's rephrase the situation. In your career, how long would you retain your job if you were offending a percentage of the company's clientele?

If you owned a business and an employee was making derogatory comments towards customers, how long would you continue to employ that person?

Had his comments been offensive to women, veterans, or another race would this debate still be going on? I mean freedom of speech yeah?

Funny you should say that...
Duck Dynasty star Phil Robertson insulted African-Americans, too - The Week

[Honkey_Kong]

Here is my view on this whole thing:

Although I really don't think what Phil said was all that offensive, it really doesn't matter. A&E determined his speech to not be of the image they want their talent to portray to the public. They also had a contract with him that gave them the right to fire him if such a thing happened.

Basically, Phil has the freedom to say whatever he wants. But this free speech doesn't absolve any responsibility to the consequences of said speech. He spoke his mind, which is admirable, but A&E according to their contract has the right to do what they did in response.

Next time, Phil should think twice before doing business with a douche-bag company like A+E Networks (Hearst & Disney corporations). And really, we're just as vulnerable as he is since our employers could terminate our employment if we started saying things they didn't like.

Really goes to show you how disgusting Corporate America is.

[bass]

Here is my view on this whole thing:

Although I really don't think what Phil said was all that offensive, it really doesn't matter. A&E determined his speech to not be of the image they want their talent to portray to the public. They also had a contract with him that gave them the right to fire him if such a thing happened.

Basically, Phil has the freedom to say whatever he wants. But this free speech doesn't absolve any responsibility to the consequences of said speech. He spoke his mind, which is admirable, but A&E according to their contract has the right to do what they did in response.

Next time, Phil should think twice before doing business with a douche-bag company like A+E Networks (Hearst & Disney corporations). And really, we're just as vulnerable as he is since our employers could terminate our employment if we started saying things they didn't like.

Really goes to show you how disgusting Corporate America is.

I agree, except Phil if i am not mistaken was not on A&E show or any of their program or network when he answered the interviewer question, Phil still a free American and can live his own life without being micromanaged by as you well put it disgusting Corporate America. they don't own him our side of their network.

[Dpyle]

I agree, except Phil if i am not mistaken was not on A&E show or any of their program or network when he answered the interviewer question, Phil still a free American and can live his own life without being micromanaged by as you well put it disgusting Corporate America. they don't own him our side of their network.

Technically they do.

When your "JOB" is being a representative for a brand you lose the ability to have a public opinion outside of that brand, because everything you say and do all relates back to that job.

If Disney and nickelodeon were still employing Miley Cyrus and Amanda bynes everyone would be calling for a boycott of those networks wouldn't they?

[songdog]

People just have a hard time with the truth!

[bass]

Technically they do.

When your "JOB" is being a representative for a brand you lose the ability to have a public opinion outside of that brand, because everything you say and do all relates back to that job.

If Disney and nickelodeon were still employing Miley Cyrus and Amanda bynes everyone would be calling for a boycott of those networks wouldn't they?

I see your point but still ridicules way of thinking. people used to laugh at these things, now we get offended from the slightest twitch especially the liberals, and they preach to us about tolerance!

[Dpyle]

I see your point but still ridicules way of thinking. people used to laugh at these things, now we get offended from the slightest twitch especially the liberals, and they preach to us about tolerance!

I agree! Honestly I'm fairly pissed that this is even an issue from either side of the fence.

This is a "cause" that people feel a need to get behind? We have children going to bed hungry because they have no food, parents that aren't able to guarantee a home for their kids next week/month, service men and women over seas that don't know if they'll get to see their family face to face again, and the list goes on.

So I say remind me again why I should care that some rich guy pissed off his rich bosses and got fired.

[Honkey_Kong]

I agree, except Phil if i am not mistaken was not on A&E show or any of their program or network when he answered the interviewer question, Phil still a free American and can live his own life without being micromanaged by as you well put it disgusting Corporate America. they don't own him our side of their network.

If I'm not mistaken, most TV talent have clauses in their contracts that give their TV networks rights to fire them for what they say off camera. Their talent represents the network at all times. It's part of the celebrity package they agree to when they sign the TV deal. I think it's all bullshit what they're doing, but unless we change the system, we have to live with the PC bullshit.

By the way, DSM and Sholva, when you hear people say things that you consider offensive to gay people, does it really bother you? Or do you just write them off as douches and not care what they say?

[kelkel]

Nobody's wrong and everyone gets a trophy!

Win-Win.

[tmfsd]

Yeah it's a bit of a shame when one cannot express his own thoughts when asked about them. I find it quite similar to people getting offended at someone dressing up as a cowboy/indian/mexican/any bloody costume out there, for Halloween. Pretty soon you won't be able to do anything without getting in trouble for it

[JD250]

The idea that an employer can fire someone because of their religious views was the target of title VII of the civil rights act of 1964...... a quick read of that and the constitution will change your views about what A&E is doing. They should be taken to task over this simply on a constitutional basis over free speech and religious views, I could give 2 squirts what all the thin skinned gay folks out there think nor do I care what the religious view is..... this is about law and protecting our rights as the people. Someone is always gonna be pissed about something but the idea that someone can't say their piece without being persecuted for it is Draconian at best, what next, will we ask religious people to sit at the back of the bus? Surely the majority of this country is still smart enough to smell BS when it's served up fresh.

[Shol'va]

Lets face it..it was a baited question to do just this...stir up shiat! Here is my question...Why is it that if a Christian or Catholic or Jewish person for that matter, why is it that if they voice their opinion of gays and blacks and other controversial subjects, they get slammed all over the internet and tv and radio. But if a Muslim or Mullah or follower of the Koran voices the same opinion, then no one says a fvcking word about them? Why is it ok to criticize people of one faith for having an opinion but we cannot criticize people of the other faith for having the same opinion as the the ones we now criticize?

[bass]

Lets face it..it was a baited question to do just this...stir up shiat! Here is my question...Why is it that if a Christian or Catholic or Jewish person for that matter, why is it that if they voice their opinion of gays and blacks and other controversial subjects, they get slammed all over the internet and tv and radio. But if a Muslim or Mullah or follower of the Koran voices the same opinion, then no one says a fvcking word about them? Why is it ok to criticize people of one faith for having an opinion but we cannot criticize people of the other faith for having the same opinion as the the ones we now criticize?

well said Sholva! if we're going to preach tolerance then lets all practice it.

[rotty2]

Lets face it..it was a baited question to do just this...stir up shiat! Here is my question...Why is it that if a Christian or Catholic or Jewish person for that matter, why is it that if they voice their opinion of gays and blacks and other controversial subjects, they get slammed all over the internet and tv and radio. But if a Muslim or Mullah or follower of the Koran voices the same opinion, then no one says a fvcking word about them? Why is it ok to criticize people of one faith for having an opinion but we cannot criticize people of the other faith for having the same opinion as the the ones we now criticize?

Because they blow shit up haha

[evander87]

Lets face it..it was a baited question to do just this...stir up shiat! Here is my question...Why is it that if a Christian or Catholic or Jewish person for that matter, why is it that if they voice their opinion of gays and blacks and other controversial subjects, they get slammed all over the internet and tv and radio. But if a Muslim or Mullah or follower of the Koran voices the same opinion, then no one says a fvcking word about them? Why is it ok to criticize people of one faith for having an opinion but we cannot criticize people of the other faith for having the same opinion as the the ones we now criticize?

Or fat people. It's completely okay to call a woman a "skinny bitch" but call a fattie a fattie and watch out. And look how much women competitors catch shit from some guys telling them they look like men. WTF?!?!?!?

[kelkel]

Absolute hypocrisy isn't it.

[David LoPan]

When you ask a question to a old man from backwoods Louisiana what he thinks you better brace yourself for his opinion. He is a strong Christian and is entitled to his beliefs. People need to accept people for who they are and what they believe. I don't see what all the fuss is unless its a way to get more people to watch the show, or just people that get offended by anything someone has to say that does not go hand and hand with their beliefs. I am pretty sure that Christians peach love they neighbor, it does not say they have to support or agree with what they do.

Now is a Hollywood Movie star would have said something like this would it be such a big deal?

[JD250]

^^^^ The man simply shared what he observed as a poor white trash child in the south... how in the fvck do we get to a place where we crucify a man for telling simply what he observed amongst blacks in the south as a child??? Absolute rubbish, all of it!!! If that's what he says he observed how does that make him anything but honest? This country is so full of ignorant thin skinned fvcks, race mongers and media whores..... dumb asses!!

[Brett N]

Phil Robertson is not some uneducated idiot from the south, he is a college educated business man that just happens to be a hardcore believer in the old testament. For some reason, he doesn't realize that according to the bible, we are all equal as sinners and unless we choose christ - we're all going to hell. (I'm not a religious person at all, just saying)

That being said, A&E are paying the family to follow them and capture their "reality" moments on film. If you don't like what they say, cancel the show. Pretty simple. They won't though, because Duck Dynasty is the largest marketing cash cow on TV right now and that's the bottom line. Same reason why McDonald's is still in business even though they do not provide a quality meal anywhere on their menu.

[thisAngelBites]

Phil Robertson is not some uneducated idiot from the south, he is a college educated business man that just happens to be a hardcore believer in the old testament. For some reason, he doesn't realize that according to the bible, we are all equal as sinners and unless we choose christ - we're all going to hell. (I'm not a religious person at all, just saying)

You're kidding me! That guy went to uni? He needs to get right back there and get his money back. I read the interview and the guy is either a moron, or he's doing an oustanding job acting like one.

[Bonaparte]

You're kidding me! That guy went to uni? He needs to get right back there and get his money back. I read the interview and the guy is either a moron, or he's doing an oustanding job acting like one.

Agreed.
I was subjected to half an episode once, and I cannot figure out why anyone watches this show.
And don't even get me started on what the History Channel, Discovery Channel, and TLC have become...

[ghettoboyd]

Agreed.
I was subjected to half an episode once, and I cannot figure out why anyone watches this show.
And don't even get me started on what the History Channel, Discovery Channel, and TLC have become...

come on man Pawn Stars is gold, and don't even get me started about Ancient Aliens....

[thisAngelBites]

Agreed.
I was subjected to half an episode once, and I cannot figure out why anyone watches this show.
And don't even get me started on what the History Channel, Discovery Channel, and TLC have become...

I watched an episode of my own free will, sort of wondering about the hubbub about the show. I should have known better as I have been similarly disappointed with books on bestseller lists, but then I have enjoyed big hits like the West Wing. But it does hurt knowing I could have been sleeping instead of watching that episode.

I thought history channel was getting to be a problem (haven't they renamed it the world war II channel? ) , but the discovery channel too?

[Honkey_Kong]

I watched an episode of my own free will, sort of wondering about the hubbub about the show. I should have known better as I have been similarly disappointed with books on bestseller lists, but then I have enjoyed big hits like the West Wing. But it does hurt knowing I could have been sleeping instead of watching that episode.

I thought history channel was getting to be a problem (haven't they renamed it the world war II channel? ) , but the discovery channel too?

Back when they were the WW2 channel they were a few notches up from what they've become.

[Bonaparte]

I thought history channel was getting to be a problem (haven't they renamed it the world war II channel? ) , but the discovery channel too?

History used to be the WWII channel (in its glory days, 10-15 years ago when they played mostly historical documentaries). Now that the network people have decided that "history is made everyday", all bets are off and any show following blue collar idiots toiling and getting in fights is big business.
Discovery has done the same. They help me "discover" things and people that should be shunned and banished to the deepest cave, not put on public display.

[Metalject]

I watched an episode of my own free will, sort of wondering about the hubbub about the show. I should have known better as I have been similarly disappointed with books on bestseller lists, but then I have enjoyed big hits like the West Wing. But it does hurt knowing I could have been sleeping instead of watching that episode.

I thought history channel was getting to be a problem (haven't they renamed it the world war II channel? ) , but the discovery channel too?

I think you inadvertently proved a point that was being made while disagreeing with the point yourself.

I have no idea how you lean in terms of politics, social issues or that sort of thing. However, it's well known (in the states anyway) that people that lean right hated the west wing and people that lean left loved and. And the majority of DD watchers are right leaning and those that hate it lean left.

Left and right, in the U.S. has gone far beyond political divide and into social divide.

And a for the record comment, many of the Robertson family are educated in terms of school....although I place little value on that type of education any more. It means absolutely nothing and I say that as someone that's considered highly educated by what left wing people deem educated. Education, in the U.S. is a joke.

[thisAngelBites]

I think maybe I should repeat what I said earlier, since it seems it was overlooked.

I read the interview and the guy is either a moron, or he's doing an oustanding job acting like one.

I'd say the entire controversy revolves around his GQ interview, but maybe you disagree. I'm sorry if you have some preconception in your mind that I was talking about the bible quote, but I didn't say anything about any bible quotes. I'm sorry you didn't understand what I wrote. He says plenty of factually inaccurate stuff in that interview.

[thisAngelBites]

And now, I'm just responding to you. Look, I'm not trying to be a jerk, either. But I am not prepared to be insulted and lectured to by someone who has not even taken the time to read what I actually wrote, and in spite of your protestations to the contrary, it certainly gives all appearance that this is what has happened. I think it's rude, even if it is, as you say, unintentional.

Let me walk you through what was ACTUALLY said:

You're kidding me! That guy went to uni? He needs to get right back there and get his money back. I read the interview and the guy is either a moron, or he's doing an oustanding job acting like one.

This is me being JUDGEMENTAL based one what Phil Robertson said to the GQ interviewer. See where I bolded and said that I READ what Robertson said?? Let me say one more time, just for clarity, I AM JUDGING PHIL ROBERTSON AND HIS EDUCATION BASED ON HIS QUOTES IN THE WRITTEN GQ INTERVIEW. And if anyone has a problem with that, well that's fine with me; I stand by my judgement.

Then, the first person responds who has not read what I wrote:

Really, sounds like you guys are a little judgemental. Just because someone has a slow southern draw doesn't make them uneducated. He has a masters in Education if I remember right. 6 year degree. H

Notice that this person, for some reason unbeknownst to me, erroneously thinks I am judging Robertson based on his "slow southern draw", when in fact, I SAID NOTHING ABOUT THE MANNER IN WHICH ROBERTSON SPEAKS - I AM BEING CRITICAL OF THE SUBSTANCE OF WHAT HE SAID.

So I responded to find out why in god's name someone would assume that I am stupid enough to judge Robertson's lack of knowledge based on HIS SOUTHERN ACCENT.

Now, here's post 47, which you referred to as evidence of the fact that I am deluding myself about my judgmentalism.

*I'm* judgmental? You assumed my view of his lack of intellect was because of how he speaks? Perhaps you can show me where I said that. If you read the interview and can't figure out that the man is uneducated, in spite of any degrees he has, you might ask what I am talking about instead of presuming that my intellect is of the sort where I think I can guess someone's IQ because of their accent.

Notice, that if you read the quote I was responding to (which was posted along with it, and in this case, is in the text box just above this one) it would be clear that I was referring to being called judgemental for equating southern accents with uneducatedness, which I did not say.

Then, slightly later, you come along and deliver an unwarranted homily about how judgment is actually necessary in life (which I happen to agree with), and then smugly admonish me that "honesty with ourselves is a better platform to entertain a debate from." That's where the reading impairment comes in.

And I am being as kind as I can when I say this, but either you don't quite read all the words when people write, and don't want to admit it, or you are just not able to follow the discussion. Or perhaps you are just trolling.

I have tried to help you understand why I find your misguided comment rude, by taking it step by step, to recapitulate what was said, and to fill in any information that you missed. If you still don't understand and want to cling to your misrepresentation of what I wrote, well, I've done the best I can, and am pretty much finished, except for any consequential judgments I may make.

[>Good Luck<]

How come nobody is seeking consequences for the person who asked the question? The reporter... why are reporters free of consequence of thing they provoke???

>good luck<
"He who can take advice is sometimes superior to those who give it"

[RaginCajun]

How come nobody is seeking consequences for the person who asked the question? The reporter... why are reporters free of consequence of thing they provoke??? >good luck< "He who can take advice is sometimes superior to those who give it"

They get paid to do just that, and have a right to free press, also in the constitution.

[>Good Luck<]

They get paid to do just that, and have a right to free press, also in the constitution.

And as phil is not free from the consequences of his free speech, they shouldnt be free from consequence of their free press

>good luck<
"He who can take advice is sometimes superior to those who give it"