Is there an anatomical limit to how many times someone can put their foot in their mouth?
Consider the case of CNN's Piers Morgan who on Twitter moments ago actually accused former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin of getting Martin Bashir fired by MSNBC:
Says the woman who drove out Martin Bashir... > RT @SarahPalinUSA Free speech is an endangered species.— Piers Morgan (@piersmorgan) December 19, 2013
For some background, Morgan was responding to a previous Palin tweet which contained a link to her Facebook comment denouncing A&E for firing Duck Dynasty star Phil Robertson for remarks he made about homosexuality in GQ magazine:
Free speech is an endangered species. Those “intolerants” hatin’ and taking on the Duck Dynasty patriarch for... http://t.co/yJXfwbsDLT— Sarah Palin (@SarahPalinUSA) December 19, 2013
With that as pretext, accusing Palin of driving out Bashir is absurd on several levels.
First off, Noah Rothman correctly observed Thursday:
Say what you will about Sarah Palin and her level of influence, but it’s safe to say that it does not extend to the executives at 30 Rock. Furthermore, while some may differ on whether or not Bashir should have been removed for his comments, insisting that someone should defecate and urinate in a former vice presidential candidate’s mouth is indisputable cause for disciplinary action.
Palin didn’t “drive” anyone out of MSNBC. The network determined that Bashir’s comments were so offensive that, in spite of the fact that their audience is trained to consume such commentary, he could no longer represent the network. In this case, she was a victim. To attack Palin as somehow being an instigator in that circumstance is nonsense.
What's also nonsense is that Morgan himself called for disciplinary action against Bashir.
This is from a November 26 discussion with a senior writer for The Hollywood Reporter about MSNBC firing Alec Baldwin for his homophobic rant:
PIERS MORGAN: I mean, you made an interesting point and I thought which is that Martin Bashir who's a fellow Brit who's on air at MSNBC, he got into hot water of a comment he made attacking Sarah Palin over her analogy of slavery to modern day issues. He's still on air, even though most people found his comments reprehensible including many people at MSNBC. Alec Baldwin said his comments in a street where a paparazzi was trying to take pictures of his new baby and, you know, he says, they're different situations, are they? Can you draw that distinction?
And this is from a December 2 discussion with a crisis manager:
MORGAN: Even though Martin Bashir, one of their cable guys, came out with a comment that many people believes or analogy about slavery and Sarah Palin and so on which many believe is much more offensive and yet he remained on air is there a hypocrisy there or double standard?
As such, Morgan from his CNN perch twice appeared to be calling on MSNBC to punish Bashir for his remarks in a similar fashion as they did Baldwin.
Yet he's pointing the finger at Palin - who was the target of Bashir's attack - for getting Bashir fired?
Boggles the mind, doesn't it?
Of course, Morgan has stuck his foot in his mouth ridiculing Palin before.
As NewsBusters reported in October, Morgan linked to a fake news site to mock Palin.
This resulted in Palin writing at Facebook the next day:
"Oh dear Piers, thank you so much for all your invitations to appear on your shambolic show, including the adoring message you sent. But is it still any wonder why I've politely responded that I'm too busy doing, um, er... pretty much anything to accept the invite?"
Should be interesting to see how Palin responds to Morgan's recent inanity.