"Where's the ACLU?"

That's the question that we hear constantly from anti-ACLU types. Whenever they perceive an injustice, particularly against a conservative, they cry, "Where's the ACLU? Why aren't they defending this person?" The point of the accusation, of course, is to give the impression of inconsistency on the part of the ACLU. Here's a perfect example recently, from Tucker Carlson. On May 1st, he was ranting about Rush Limbaugh being railroaded by prosecutors in Florida and here's what he had to say:

CARLSON: Where's all the -- I'm dead serious. Where is the ACLU? Where is all the -- the chorus of the anti-drug people, and I'm on their side, the anti-drug-law people, because I actually don't like drug laws that much.

MADDOW: Fair enough.

CARLSON: But why aren't they standing up for Rush Limbaugh? They're not standing up for him because they think he's a right-wing creep. That's why.

Well Tucker, this one is easy to answer. The ACLU was filing briefs on behalf of Rush in the Florida court. Yes, they were on his side. It reminds me of Jerry Falwell's ridiculous lie about the Massachusetts students who were wrongly punished for handing out candy canes with religious messages attached to them. He proclaimed that the students had a right to do so "no matter what the ACLU might propagate". The only problem? Not only was the ACLU on the same side in the case, it was the ACLU who contacted the school on the students' behalf, told the administration that they were violating the law and got the punishment dropped.

Tags

More like this

Not that this will surprise anyone, but even when he's right, he can't seem to avoid misrepresenting what the ACLU says or does. In this post at STACLU, he cites a column by Nat Hentoff (one of my absolute favorite writers) where Hentoff takes the ACLU to task for inconsistency in a pair of cases,…
A few days ago I wrote about Volokh's use of the phrase "ACLU Derangement Syndrome" in relation to Clayton Cramer, who had claimed that the ACLU was likely to seek a law banning parents from teaching their children about religion. Volokh correctly called Cramer on the carpet for this, saying that…
Dru Stevenson, an associate professor at the South Texas School of Law in Houston, has linked to my post on the ACLU defending the rights of Christians. He also left a comment in response to the post that preceeded that one, which was about John Scalzi's attempt to find Christian lawyers who did…
Continuing on the theme from the other day, here are more examples of the innumerable cases where, contrary to the absurd rhetoric of the likes of Joseph Farah, the ACLU has defended the free exercise rights of Christians and Christian organizations. Here's a story about how the ACLU of Nevada has…

Damn the ACLU! If they're not missing out on an important case, they're making people that complain about them missing out on important cases look like hypocrites.

The bastards. I've got half a mind to complain that they're not defending the Westboro Baptists Church's right to "protest" military funerals...

Actually, some ACLU chapters are complaining about their state's new ban on protests at military funerals. It depends on the state and the exact wording, of course, but I've seen quotes from various ACLU spokespeople saying that the new law in their state was too vague and such. It'll be interesting to see if any suits get filed.

I always ask this, but has anyone tried or demanded that Tucker Carlson actually aknowledge this? It's not that hard to contact some of these pundit folks, and sometimes they'll at least say more stupid things, if not even retract and correct themselves on air. Carlson is something of a snotty jerk, but I'd rank him as one of the more decent conservative pundits when it comes to admitting error.

He also had the best description of Bush's Karen Hughes lying to his face: that perverse moment when she's lying, he knows she's lying, SHE knows that he knows he's lying (since they both saw the same things together) and yet she lies anyway.

Carlson admitted his mistake after Media Matters documented his misstatement on their website.

Over the years, I've spent a fair amount of time beating up on the ACLU, and I assume that tradition will continue in earnest. But in this case, I was wrong; they were right. Good for the ACLU.

While Carlson can't resist a bit of snark about how he will undoubtedly need to keep fighting the evil ACLU in the future, on this occasion he dined on crow.

I particularly enjoy the "Where's the ACLU?" line when it's applied to criminal cases, as in, "The ACLU represented NAMBLA, but where are they when a child gets molested?!"

OH!

SNAP!

By beervolcano (not verified) on 24 May 2006 #permalink