First watch this video:
Outspoken public education opponent Kay Brooks defends the questioner:
And in fairness to the subject of the Scene article, the context of the "one profanity" is the politics between the school superintendent and an opponent. What entitles the earlier set of politics to excuse and what relegates the latter to disclaimer?
Apparently, this crossed the line for some. Because McCain responded that it was an excellent question it proves that he hates women. Please. The question is valid. It could have been worded more elegantly but this is politics.But earlier this year, Ms. Brooks took pains to warn her readers about "a profanity" in a Scene article:
The Nashville Scene is an adult publication. If you click on the link above there is no telling what sort of advertisement you'll get to see. Also there is one profanity in the piece.Cussing is just "politics" in Clinton-hating circles, but if it comes from the Scene, it warrants a warning? The f-bomb is practically buried in the text of the Scene's long article, but almost immediately after the reader clicks on Kay Brooks' link to the YouTube video, "bitch" hits you in the face in bold letters followed a few seconds later by its clearly audible articulation.
And in fairness to the subject of the Scene article, the context of the "one profanity" is the politics between the school superintendent and an opponent. What entitles the earlier set of politics to excuse and what relegates the latter to disclaimer?
No comments:
Post a Comment