Hank Williams Jr. Controversy

Remove all ads!

I know he's been talking about running for Senate in Tennessee for a few years now, but I think he may actually do it now. Is that what you're referring to, T2?

 

For LKD and Snook,

Is this an instance of Hank being the "professional offendee at work again", and did he wait a few days before posting the "I quit" on his website until AFTER he weighed in with Sarah Palin and Sharron Angle?

 

That's just it DR, he's all talk. He wouldn't like to actually answer to anyone other than himself.... IMO, he's a real hoot with his comments and he would certainly liven up any political race, but he's just not going to have enough fun at it to keep him interested (think of him as a big kid with ADHD and substance abuse problems).

 

Noted.

 

Wouldn't we have said the same thing about Jesse Ventura?

 

Hmm some latent hostilily there!

I had better re-state my position from the beginning so as to be as clear as possible:

1: Williams did nothing illegal or immoral by making his analogy.

2: That said, it was a politically dim thing to do -- referencing Hitler in any circumstances is a dicey thing to do, as he is probably the most evil human in existance (according to popular culture, not necessarily in terms of actual stats, please don't bombard me with a bunch of links and essays, I'm talking perception here not facts)

3: ESPN overreacted by cutting the song. It was petty and overdone and a real <w>itch move. They did not violate his first amendment rights by so doing, though, as they are not a government appendage. Whether they are a publicly owned company or a private one, whatever, they are not agents of the government, which was the main point of my earlier post.

4: Williams' statements are a little on the whiny side, but whatever. I would argue that he has every right to be offended for being treated so harshly over one minor incident. He's speaking his mind, but AFAIK he's not claiming racism or other such crap, and he's not trying to sue ESPN for having an opinion contrary to his. He's not invoking human rights commissions and trying to have valid, peaceful opposing viewpoints declared criminal. However, if he were to sue for breach of contract, I believe he might* have a case. Not a slam dunk case, but a case nonetheless.

I don't think anything I've said here is really outlandish.

*I have no idea the details of his arrangement with ESPN, so please note the use of the modal verb "might" in this sentence and spare me the hystrionics.