absurd...

Apr 6, 2008 06:36 PM

I have been thinking about what you said and this is far more complicated than what you are saying above.

First of all, as a matter of principle and in a completely sterile and generic sense, for a PRIVATE company to maintain the standards of its employees is fine. We always complain when the government dictates and say it should be left to the private sector to do this itself. Furthermore, Rhodes is a public figure and it reflects on her employer. I'm sure that the shareholders, officers, and directors in XYZ Inc. would also be pissed if their CEO went on a cussing out a former First Lady, even if it was completely out of the office unrelated to his or her duties, because it reflects poorly on the company and the CEO. Many companies have provisions about this kind of thing in their employment contracts about how an employee presents hisself or herself in public. Think about the CEOs who've been fired for having affairs, among many other examples. (However, I don't know enough about Rhodes--if she's a comedian by trade and the network knew this when they hired her then they should have expected this, but for the purpose of this discussion I'll assume she isn't a comedian but strictly a radio commentator as it appears she is.) Now, when a private company is actually policing itself, why should we complain? This does not involve an element of a private company voluntarily forfiting a right to the government as you seem to say. But I said this in the most sterile generic sense possible.

Of course, lets not fool ourselves. In this particular case, the reason the "standards" are being upheld is NOT because this company is a bastion of morality--its because this woman atttacked "one of their own" (actually two) and that is unacceptable to the employer. They can't have Air America employees attacking fellow Libs. Air America and Rhodes are jointly the epitome of amorality.

If they were truly principled, they would not say any of the horrible filth they spew about Bush and Cheney daily, or about Petraeus, or any number of people they simply disagree with. The problem can't be solved by more dumb regulation. Its solved when people treat each other with dignity and respect. If you don't like Bush's politics, disagree respectfully--don't make it personal and insulting, and don't call someone General Betray Us. I'd like to see that morality upheld.

Its funny how the Dems are imploding with this Obama-Clinton rivalry. Their reaction to the dilemma is like a divide-by-zero-error on the computer or calculator--they simply don't know what in the world to do about this mess they're in. They can't comprehend it at all. Hillary is simply too selfish to give up her obviously hopeless fight, and she's bloodied the whole party in the process. She isn't a true democrat in spirit, she's just an evil opportunist taking advantage of the system and her party is just a tool for her. She doesn't care at all for her party or for the country, which she thinks owes the presidency to her. She's is trying to blackmail her party into giving her the nomination saying that if they don't give it to her, she will destroy them--and she is doing just that. Carry on.

Besides, Rhodes was wrong anyway. If anyone is the f-ing whore, its clearly Bill as we all learned...

Apr 7, 2008 04:33 AM