You know that someone has royally screwed up and is now spinning, when people on the right are going “HUH?”
First the Video:
and now the story from the NYT’s Media Decoder Blog:
Dr. Laura Schlessinger, the conservative talk radio commentator under fire for repeatedly using a racial epithet, announced on Tuesday that she was ending her long-running radio show.
Dr. Schlessinger made the announcement on Tuesday night on “Larry King Live,” saying she made a decision not to renew her contract when it expires at the end of the year and suggesting that she did not want her opinions and language, however provocative, to be muzzled.
But she stressed that she was not retiring, only ending her show, and would continue to write books and appear at speaking engagements.“I want to regain my First Amendment rights,” she said. “I want to be able to say what’s on my mind and in my heart and what I think is helpful and useful without somebody getting angry, some special interest group deciding this is the time to silence a voice of dissent and attack affiliates, attack sponsors. I’m sort of done with that.”
“I’m not quitting,” she told Larry King. “I feel energized actually — stronger and freer to say the things that I believe need to be said for people in this country.”
Sounds like a “I’m a victim” speech to me….
Z on TV from the Baltimore Sun Agrees:
The end of her radio career (in January when her contract concludes) is the result of her own ugliness on-air with a caller last week who asked “Dr. Laura” about the use of racially charged language. Schlessinger used the N-word 11 repeatedly in her answer, and listening to the tape, I was shocked by the aggression that I could hear building in Schlessinger’s voice. She was using the word as a weapon.
Some of my colleagues have used the glib phrase “she lost it” to describe Schlessinger’s comments in that exchange, but I think it was almost the opposite: I think perhaps she was letting her speech connect to some deep seated feelings she had, and that is what made her words all the more troubling to me.
Ed Morrissey, while not so personally critical, does point out the obvious:
If Schlessinger feels that getting paid to talk puts too much restriction on her broadcast content, that may well be a legitimate point, but as noted above, broadcasting is only one of several means available to her in commercializing her speech. Besides, the First Amendment doesn’t confer the right to profit from speech, only the right to speak. It isn’t an entitlement to publication. It also means that people can speak out and disagree with what Schlessinger says, even if she sees that speech as an “attack” on her, her sponsors, and her affiliates. It’s a little late in the game to suddenly get sensitive about criticism, and just a little hypocritical to cast it as an “attack” while demanding the supposed return of her First Amendment rights.
Schlessinger offered a full apology for her remarks, calling them “wrong.” She didn’t evade responsibility for them, nor did she offer the “I’m sorry if anyone was offended” non-apology apology. Schlessinger should have stopped there, instead of making herself into a First Amendment martyr when she has never had an issue of being “silenced” or having those rights taken from her. Even those of us who work daily in the First Amendment space seem to need reminders that the Constitution does not give people the right to be free from criticism after their own exercise of free speech.
I have to agree with all of the above. I am going to be quite blunt and honest with you. I do not like this woman at all. Why? Well, I have to say, that I have problem with people who try an articulate family values, who come from basically broken families; further more, I have a problem with people who are not exactly honest about their personal history. The truth is, Dr. Laura has repeatedly lied about her family, her previous marriages and a host of other things. That is, until people, who were concerned that she was not telling the truth, did some investigative work on her and found out the truth. This forced her to admit that she had not been exactly telling the truth. This to me, ruins any credibility that you might have; I’m sorry, but if I am going to take advice from anyone, it is going to be from someone, who’s actually coming from a background of ideal family values.
Lastly, there is the issue of religion. I am sorry, but Religion, to me, is not like trying on pair of socks. How any person, can sit on a radio show and give Conservative Traditional and yes, even Christian values; all the while not even being a practicing Christian or any other religion for that matter, is quite beyond me. First, Dr. Laura was a Jew, then she was not; the lady needs to pick a Religion and stick with it.
I am sorry if this sounds like I am being overly critical of Dr. Laura; I know she most likely means to do well. But I believe the she could do and be much better; if she would just be more honest and open about who she is. Plus, find a religion that she can handle and stick with it.