[nicknack]

Those comments fall under "stupid/insensitive." Would you make the argument that defending Clinton should be illegal? Seriously?

And you sir, are the product of... what... Oxford?

[GreatOne]

You are failing to distinguish between making speech "illegal", and private condemnation of "stupid/insensitive" comments, followed by attempts through the free market to persuade others to voluntarily withdraw their financial support which gives the offender the air time to make said comments.

Keep in mind that only government action to restrict speech falls under First Amendment scrutiny (i.e., making it "illegal"). Any private action to restrict speech (i.e., pulling advertising from a show) does not.

Your misconstruing of the two is the evidence of your public education. Quite frankly, your argument (making speech illegal?!?) leads me to believe that you still are in high school, in which case I would suggest you transfer to the nearest Catholic school immediately.