Deconstructing Whoopi - a Republican Fires Back

In response to being fired by Slim-Fast for her lewd and outrageous anti-Bush diatribe at John Kerry’s exclusive, closed-door fundraiser on July 8^th, the now-infamous Radio City “Hate Fest,” Whoopi Goldberg stated that “America's heart and soul is freedom of expression without fear of reprisal.” A close reading of Ms. Goldberg’s remarks divulges Hollywood’s fundamental misunderstanding of the First Amendment and the freedom of expression. The First Amendment is not the exclusive property and privilege of the Hollywood elite; but, perhaps more pointedly, the First Amendment absolutely does not shield people who exercise their First Amendment rights from the consequences of the resulting expression. Unlike the idyllic bubble-world that is Hollywood, in the real world – including portions of fly-over country that elite celebrities like Goldberg would never dare set foot in – actions have consequences.

Of course, the authorities cannot stop a speaker from exercising their freedom of expression for fear of the audiences’ reaction – the so-called “heckler’s veto” – but, on the other hand, the speaker has no right to suppress that reaction. Goldberg averred that “The fact that I am no longer the spokesman for Slim-Fast makes me sad, but not as sad as someone trying to punish me for exercising my right as an American to speak my mind in any forum I choose.” Someone should point out to Ms. Goldberg that the First Amendment only protects her from government reprisal; it does not insulate her from the ire of ordinary Americans who she might have actually insulted with her remarks. Apparently, the fact that people might actually disagree with her never crossed her mind; whither the favorite phrase of the entertainment elite “dissent is patriotic.” For Ms. Goldberg, dissent is patriotic, as long as it is not her remarks that one is dissenting from.

In fact, the First Amendment is not the exclusive privilege of the denizens of Beverly Hills; regular folks – ordinary consumers – had every right to express their own ire by demanding that Slim-Fast drop Whoopi. To paraphrase Justice Holmes, America is a marketplace of ideas. Ms. Goldberg’s overt belief that her ideas are superior to John Q. American who expressed his idea – i.e., “I choose not to buy products that Whoopi is associated with” – to Slim-Fast merely evinces her sheer arrogance.

Predictably, instead of accepting responsibility for her actions, Whoopi blamed the Republican Party for her dismissal – a pathetic cop out. Her automatic assumption that every single incensed person who contacted Slim-Fast was a Republican Party operative is preposterous. One needn’t be a registered Republican to be insulted by what is known of her remarks. In her defense, perhaps her remarks were taken out of context by reporters. If that is indeed the case, Americans will never know – the videotape of the event has been shrouded in secrecy, and the Kerry campaign has refused to let America see it. Perhaps it has been secured in Al Gore’s “lock-box”?

The bottom line is that if vociferous celebrities choose to carelessly, and publicly, emote with inflammatory rhetoric, which is their right, the ultimate audience of that rhetoric has every right to react with expression of its own – including boycotts. In case Ms. Goldberg hasn’t heard, boycotts are one of the most time-honored forms of expression. And, for Ms. Goldberg to call the indignation expressed by Americans participating in the boycott “disingenuous” merely adds insult to injury. The implication is that that the elites have a monopoly on genuine expression, which is asinine and deprecating.

Other reactions to Ms. Goldberg’s dismissal from Slim-Fast have been quite laughable, albeit predictable. Asa Khalif, head of Racial Unity USA in Pennsylvania, and self-proclaimed “diversity promoter” released a statement relating to Goldberg’s firing. He stated that “I smell racism from beginning to end. . . . SlimFast must realize that black women have every right to voice their views.” Well, the race-baiters are out in force. Now it is just a matter of time until Jesse Jackson is marching, with his trademarked grim expression, on Slim-Fast headquarters. In all frankness, Khalif’s absurd remarks should not merit media attention. However, it won’t be long until the misery merchants and masters of discord capitalize on the opportune firing of – gasp – a black woman. Perhaps Mr. Khalif glossed over the fact that people found the content of the remarks objectionable, not the person delivering them. I can guarantee Mr. Khalif that if lilly-white Michael Moore had delivered those remarks, the reaction would have been identical.

This is absolutely right on the money!

Most entertainers think because they are in the limelight, this should give them the right to do or say anything they want. WRONG!

Politics are dirty business. America is split 50-50. Most entertainers think that for their fans, the sun rises and sets on them, and that they will be able to influence their fans to their way of thinking.

WRONG!

In order to satisfy their total fan base, they need to stay out of politics. They voice an opinion (in a public forum) about their choice for President, and 50% of their fan base is voting the other way, this could leave the entertainer 50% short on their fan base.

I have turned against many entertainers this time around just because of their stance on politics. I have a very bad taste in my mouth for them, when I used to have love.

If an entertainer wants to get into politics, they need to get out of the entertainment business.

Simple as that.

The liberals were pretty much silent on incidents like this one:

"CLINTON HAS WOMAN ARRESTED FOR INSULTING HIM!"

"Mrs. Mendoza was upset over last month's bombing deaths of 19 U.S. airmen in Saudi Arabia. The president grasped her hand and she protested with words of protest:

"You suck, and those boys died!"

"Ralph Grayson, special agent in charge of the Secret Service's Chicago office, said his agency has an "ongoing investigation" into the matter.The Secret Service said Mrs. Mendoza made a "threatening statement" to the president."

link

(BTW - congrats on working for a President, it would be quite an honor!)

Look Ol' man Tucker - the same thing is done to FreePers and Protest Warriors at things like liberal book signings. They are forced into areas away from the event. Some of the conservative protesters have had their signs torn up and some have had acts of violence committed against them. But once again, and pay attention here, Whoopie was able to express her views at a fundraiser with no censorship, and without anyone putting her into a free speech zone. You are trying to make the ignorant point that the reaction to Goldberg's drunken rant against the President is the same thing as putting people into a free speech zone. It isn't the same. Now go back to sleep.

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.