All right, "Dr" Laura went on a racial tirade during a recent radio show, repeatedly spouting off the N-word. As always, this caused a massive uproar and backlash. Now the good doctor is saying she will quit, and pouting about the violation of her "First amendment rights".

Am I wrong when I say that is total nonsense because no government agent tried to censor or punish her speech? If the govt isn't involved in any manner whatsoever, can First amendment rights be violated?

I remember once when my college newspaper ran an ad by an anti-Semitic group which claimed the holocaust never occurred. The newspaper justified running the ad, saying they didn't want to violate anyone's First amendment rights. Again, since there was absolutely no govt involvement in this case, does the First amendment mean a private newspaper must run a callous ad?

I say if no govt action is involved, that's all you can demand. If people who are offended by "Dr" Laura's speech strongly protest and threaten to boycott sponsors, etc. then that is not a First amendment violation. I say if no govt agent censors or prosecutes you, shut up about the F.A.

Am I off base here? I'm by no means a legal expert. I would like to know if I'm right or wrong.

controversy, or if she fears suit for defamation

       If the advertisers and irate listeners are complaining to the FCC, and the FCC is planning to fine her, her company, or the license holder, or prohibit her from future uses of the N word on the air, then there would be a First Amendment issue. The First Amendment, of course, does not protect “obscene” speech (sorry Howard Stern) but it does protect “indecent” speech and “profane” speech, and “political” speech. Presumably her use of the N word would fall in one of these latter caterories.

      Regulation is permitted and post speech penalties are permitted but prior restraint almost never. So whenever the FCC steps into the picture, there are always First Amendment issues.

    Another exception would be if she defamed the caller by her use of the word and the caller sues for defamation. Here the court system and the law become involved and the First Amendment will affect the burden of proof imposed on the plaintiff.

but, yet, I engage in same tactics with him, " Iago" & " Quadimoto" Clearly, they're not "worth the powder to blow up" So why do we do it ? Vindictiveness ?--------LMAO !

Best thing to do is just ignore him----while I'm at it, should follow my own advice------

I buried the second decorated multiple war veteran(POW to boot)last year. They both allowed the 'serial numbers' to remain on their forearms to remind them of worse times.

They were/are still the driving forces behind many of my beliefs/opinions. They fought, and sacrificed, for our(citizens)right to speak our minds. While they always claimed that they didn't fight for the right of hate speech, one of those men NEVER evolved beyond the use of terms like nigger and coon. Very embarrassing indeed. But he still put his life on the line for the likes of Dr. Laura to have at it verbally.

I rarely cater to much of Dr. Laura's bulldurham. She is self-righteous at the least. There are Supreme Court rulings regarding hate speech being, or not being, protected by law. I don't remember what the say.

Actually I have mixed feelings on the subject.

I believe strongly in free speech, even speech which I vehemently despise. Has anyone ever heard me ask for even the likes of Willy to be muzzled?

That said, the radio station has a duty to their shareholders as well. Her first ammendment rights should not trump the station's fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders. She has the right to say any thing she wants, the station however is not obligated to give her, or anyone else for that matter, a platform from which to speak at their expense.

-- Modified on 8/18/2010 7:21:13 AM

"Best thing to do is just ignore him----while I'm at it, should follow my own advice-"
So why do we do it ? Vindictiveness
"Posted by Priapus53  , 2/15/2010 4:18:14 PM  
Which is why I'm an independent."

I can't help but notice you never attempt to battle the intellectuals on this board,with any words  of substance,  other than an occasional one liner, while laughing at yourself.
I admit I am ninth grade drop out hoping to one day pass my GED, however I  know the true definitions of many words, you do not understand.
"Hiatus" or "cutting back" does not mean taking a five minute break after your third helping at the Bellagio Buffet, and then going back for more.
Your vindictiveness on the boards comes from your feelings of inadequacy, most likely due to the psychological effect of your obesity, and the social discrimination you face every day.In the real world you are faced with silent and blatant mockery,because of your obesity,while you waddle away in shame , with nothing to say.
When you come here you hide behind your screen of anonymity ridiculing those such as me who often make spelling mistakes,smiling at yourself, while thinking other board members are cheering your self perceived intelligence, and your false assumption you hold power, over drop outs like me.
"Independent" does not mean sitting home "alone" eating a gallon of ice cream,and a box of vanilla wafers, while hiding behind your screen making fun of lior.
If you think you frustrate me, think again.I don't care who you are, or what your excuse, I don't tolerate bullies without a fight.
I can tie one shoe while standing on the other foot. Try it sometime. I am not easily frustrated.
 Now waddle on with your most superior skill of copy and paste.
You reap what you sow.

She used to be on a local radio station and I was glad when she was gone ..Couldn't stand her voice, or her ridiculous advice, and if I was in my car I turned her off within a few minutes.
I agree 100% with what she said in this matter of dispute.
 http://mediamatters.org/blog/201008120045

particularly for believing "Iago's" false description of me as "obese"-------Jerkoff, can I sell you the Brooklyn bridge ?------LMAO ! Tying your shoelaces ?!--thought you'd need an instruction manual for that.

As for Liorr, he's been condemned by many, including OSP. Try reading those posts aloud, the only way you can read-----

Bub, you have a real issue with "anger management"---------I've also seen this on the GD board with your numerous arguments there. Seek help.

You also need help for saying that it was someone's "karma" that they die an untimely & horrible death. Evidence for that can be found on the link below .

Quad, I think your insecurity over your lack of matriculation has forced you to become the "lapdog" of the right on this board; I find that pitiful.

Like shooting a school of fish in a barrel--but, at least those fish graduated High School----

King of Fools indeed.


-- Modified on 8/18/2010 10:23:53 AM

-- Modified on 8/18/2010 10:26:30 AM

-- Modified on 8/18/2010 11:07:58 AM

"Bub, you have a real issue with "anger management"---------I've also seen this on the GD board with your numerous arguments there. Seek help."
"particularly for believing "Iago's" false desecription of me as "obese"
"at least those fish graduated High School"
-- Modified on 8/18/2010 10:23:53 AM

-- Modified on 8/18/2010 10:26:30 AM


"Numerous" arguments on the General Board???
You really are quite good at revealing  yourself as a delusional Porker, in complete denial.
I have no clue who Iago is,nor do I need anyone to tell me about your love of buffets. It is more than evident, you have difficulty catching your breath, when tying your shoes.
Speaking of fish,try broiling instead of frying. Much better for your health and weight.
I advise you to Check your dictionary .A group of fish is called a school. That doesn't mean they go to school.
 I already told you, when you modify you may erase your previous modifications..That way no one else will notice your repetitive frustration.
I have also noticed you don't use spell check when you are frustrated..
 By the way Mrs Oversized Iron Crab Pot, calling the Kettle Black ,its spelled description.

the court of public opinions. See, when you are a broadcaster of any type, your uttering must pass the court of public opinion. After all, it is rating and advertising based business and you are under contract to the broadcasting company.

One can complain about PC but, broadcasting is still business and businesses generally don't want piss off their customers.

As far as 1st amendment is concerned, there are no violations, she said what she said, she decided to leave on her own and if she didn't leave, her employer is within their right not renew her contract.

So, the entire debate becomes pointless.

There is governmental and societal.  By the first, I mean the power of government, ultimately exercised by the police.  By the second, I mean society will not allow it in the sense that if you say something, people don't have to associate with you, buy your products, or otherwise support you. The first is censoring. The second is censursing. The state does the first. Individuals - sometimes collectively - do the second

The First Amendment prohibits cesnsorship by the State.  California cannot shut down the L.A. Times for an offensive, stupid, inaccurate editorial or news item.  The paper can print what it wants and the governor can use it for toilet paper if he wants, but that is it.

On the other hand, I do not have to buy the paper, and I can tell my friends not to.  (Don't get me wrong. THis is an example. I do subscribe, at times regretfully, to the rag.)

A college newpaper has "the right" to run the ad.  However, readers have the right to boycott. Also, the "right" TO run the ad means it has the choice NOT to run the ad.  They make the choice. They live with the consequences.  As long as the State does not penalize them, it is not a First Amendment issue.

With that said, this was a general description.  There are always exceptions. But this is the basic framework.

I've never listened to her. Had to Google her on what she does. Appears she is another jackass that dispenses personal advice. Speaking of providing personal advice, therapy and the like, have you seen the latest Geico commerical? The only therapy that should be dispensed is massage therapy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JhlWddAXSRA

You can please some of the people all of the time.
You can please all of the people some of the time.
You can't please all of the people all of the time.
However, you can piss off everyone all of the time.
No that's an acheivable goal.

Maybe Dr. Laura  just trying to succede.

I don' know what she said or the context, but it sounds like a publicity stunt.

You have the right to be an idiot.

You have the right to be bigotted.

You have the right to have a radio program that no one wants to listen to.

You have the right to have a program that sponsors don't want.

"You have the right to be an idiot.
You have the right to have a radio program that no one wants to listen to."

Unfortunately a whole LOT of idiots listen to Dr Laura often,including the caller that was whining about being asked questions. Everytime I call her Dr. I wonder if I am misled..Is there proof of her Doctorate. I know one thing for sure about Laura, she is not qualified to give advice, no matter what kind of degree she bought.
I can't stand the bitch, but I did agree with her point..HBO and Black comedians use the word Nigger over and over. Shows me how ignorant they are, along with the  idiot audience laughing. Cheap thrills for weak minds.
I have some close  Black friends who occasionally ask me questions about what whites  think about this and that.. Why would that bother me? It doesn't.They call me nigger sometimes in jest. I ask them to please call me cracker, or honkey . I don't like the nigger word used around me .They say cracker or honkey would be disrespectful,and would mean they don't like me.
The whole world is turning upside down.
Confusion is a silent virus that screams out loud.





-- Modified on 8/19/2010 6:43:29 PM

Here's what an expert said on Yahoo news.

Note that Sarah Palin once again shows she has no clue about key issues. She is perhaps the most unqualified candidate for high office in U.S. history.(sorry, can't resist taking a swipe at such a nitwit)


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ynews_excl/ynews_excl_pl3441

people confuse legal rights with with moral rights. ground zero in new york is a perfect example. just because you have a legal right dosent mean you should or shouldnt do or say something. thats choice.