Just before I cut out for the long weekend, James
Taranto provided a handy rebuttal to those willing to
suppress "hate speech". RTWT if you can, but here's the
The trouble with policing hate speech is that without double standards there are no standards at all. As a practical matter, what defines hate speech is not the feeling that motivates the speaker, which can be policed only through totalitarian means if at all. It is, rather, the offense taken by the listener. The best definition of hate speech is “speech I hate”—the opposite of an objective standard.
As I type, President Obama's penultimate State of the Union
address is scheduled for tonight. Recycling a bit of Kevin D.
from last year:
The annual State of the Union pageant is a hideous, dispiriting, ugly, monotonous, un-American, un-republican, anti-democratic, dreary, backward, monarchical, retch-inducing, depressing, shameful, crypto-imperial display of official self-aggrandizement and piteous toadying, a black Mass during which every unholy order of teacup totalitarian and cringing courtier gathers under the towering dome of a faux-Roman temple to listen to a speech with no content given by a man with no content, to rise and to be seated as is called for by the order of worship — it is a wonder they have not started genuflecting — with one wretched representative of their number squirreled away in some well-upholstered Washington hidey-hole in order to preserve the illusion that those gathered constitute a special class of humanity without whom we could not live.
"Other than that, though, it's fine!"
Your insightful tweet du jour is from the immortal Nick
#StateOfTheUnionInThreeWords Watch Justified Instead— Yes, Nick Searcy! (@yesnicksearcy) January 20, 2015
That's 10pm on FX, and I'll be there.