As has been noted here repeatedly, Alec Baldwin's profanity- and slur-filled tirade against a gay gossip columnist appears not to be harming the leftist actor's career the way outbursts of inappropriate language have caused trouble for other famous people such as celebrity chef Paula Deen or radio host Don Imus.
While there have been a few commendable cases of left-leaning media figures condemning Baldwin for calling a reporter for the Daily Mail a "toxic little queen" and threatening him with a literal gay-bashing, for the most part, the left-leaning press has not given Baldwin's outburst nearly the coverage that it did to a lawsuit in which Deen admitted to using a racial slur some years ago.
The contrast between the coverage of the two is so obvious that even some media outlets that normally play dumb to liberal bias questions are beginning to explore the issue. Instead of admitting the obvious, some of these outlets are trying to explain away the double standard by raising the subject of liberal bias while simultaneously engaging in it.
ABC News started it off yesterday in a television piece during which anchor David Muir called Baldwin's rant an "alleged slur" and correspondent Gio Benitez actually said that Baldwin's wife defended him by saying "some of her best friends are gay" with no apparent awareness that that phrasing is a very common among people who are prejudiced against people of African descent.
The Washington Post's "Reliable Sources" column continued in this vein today, taking up the question of why Baldwin "probably won’t lose any job offers or A-list invitations" in light of his prolonged pattern of hatred and violent language.
The obvious answer is that Baldwin is a committed liberal donor and therefore can say anything he wants. Instead of turning to someone to point this out, the Post turned to political strategist Hilary Rosen who in addition to being a Democrat like Baldwin is also a long-time friend of the actor's.
"Being a hothead and sometimes a verbal bully is sometimes part of his persona,” Rosen told the Post. "He’s passionate about everything, he’s aggressive about everything. His outbursts are as authentic as everything else."
Of course, that is exactly what liberals have said for years about Rush Limbaugh. Certainly one could also say this about Don Imus as well. The only difference between these two and Baldwin is that they don't always toe the liberal line (though Imus frequently does).
One could also say the same about Paula Deen who is a Democrat and a supporter of President Obama. Unfortunately for her career, she had the temerity to reveal that First Lady Michelle Obama is a hypocrite when it comes to food. "She probably ate more than any other guest I've ever had on the show," Deen said in 2012.
It might be worth considering whether people who say or do something stupid deserve to lose their careers or endorsements for it but before we move to that conversation, the media need to address the obvious problem: they have a clear double standard in favor of liberals behaving badly.
Hat tip: Ace.
Update 21:37. Baldwin tried to weasel out of his language, ridiculously claiming in a letter to the left-leaning Gays and Lesbians Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) that even though he proclaimed his desire to "put my foot up your fucking ass, George Stark, but I'm sure you'd dig it too much," his insults were not meant to be degrading to gay men.
My ill-advised attack on George Stark of the Daily Mail had absolutely nothing to do with issues of anyone's sexual orientation. My anger was directed at Mr. Stark for blatantly lying and disseminating libelous information about my wife and her conduct at our friend's funeral service. As someone who fights against homophobia, I apologize.
Predictably, GLAAD was only too eager to accept his apology.
