Donald Trump

The Real Boobs Are People Who Think ESPN Must Fire Jemele Hill

Sorry Donald Trump, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, and Clay Travis: the First Amendment isn't an issue here.

|

Sanders
Chris Kleponis/CNP/Sipa USA/Newscom

Clay Travis, a sports radio host known for his incendiary right-wing views, believes in only two things, "the First Amendment and boobs." And he said so, loudly and proudly, on Brooke Baldwin's CNN show this afternoon.

His remark came during a heated discussion about the Jemele Hill controversy. Hill, a SportsCenter host and woman of color, called President Trump a white supremacist, drawing the ire of White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders, who branded it a "firing offense." Eventually, Trump himself tweeted that ESPN should "apologize for untruth!"

Sanders doubled down at a Friday press briefing, saying, "ESPN has been hypocritical, they should hold anchors to a fair and consistent standard."

Evidently that was the point Travis was attempting to make during his bizarre rant: since ESPN fired Curt Schilling for making anti-trans bathroom comments, it should be consistent and also discipline Hill.

What this has to do with the female anatomy is anyone's guess, but Travis felt the need to say, "I'm a First Amendment absolutist, I believe in only two things completely, the First Amendment and boobs." This came out of nowhere, unnerving Baldwin and prompting her to end the segment early.

The social media mobs are currently pillorying Travis for his crass comment, and deservedly so. But more people should save some outrage for his actual, substantive remarks, which are wrong.

Travis, Sanders, and Trump all seem to be making the same mistake: the First Amendment does not require ESPN to be politically neutral, or polite, or even-handed. It protects Hill's right to call Trump a white supremacist, and also Travis's right to say "boobs" on television.

It does not protect anyone from whatever social consequences they face. ESPN can punish Schilling for engaging in political speech and reward Hill for doing the same thing. If people don't like this policy, they can turn off SportsCenter. The scary thing would be if the government tried to punish any of the people involved in this strange controversy, which is why it's probably not such a good idea for government mouthpieces to imply a desire to do so.

Otherwise, neither the First Amendment nor boobs are relevant here.

NEXT: Arpaio Attorney Threatens Harvard Law Prof With Libel Suit Over Op-Ed

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. The social media mobs are currently pillorying Travis for his crass comment, and deservedly so.

    Oh stop.

    ESPN can punish Schiller

    You meant Schilling, but if you are going to make a mistake, at least make it count by going all-out with “Schlillinger.”

    1. Or Shindler

      1. They both made shells for the Nazis, but Schilling’s worked, dammit!

        1. I’m making over $12k a month working part time. I kept hearing other people tell me how much money they can make online so I decided to look into it. Well, it was all true and has totally changed my life. This is what I do,…Go this web and start your work… Good luck.. http://www.startonlinejob.com

    2. Schilackleford

  2. I am pretty sure that anyone can criticize ESPN for perceived double standards even if ESPN has a right to retain Hill because they do, in fact, have double standards.

    1. And when are boobs not relevent?

      1. Nevah!!!! NEVAH!!!! NEVAH_EVAH_EVAH!!!! (That is all).

  3. Robby completely misunderstand Travis’ point, which had nothing to do with the First Amendment and was merely pointing out ESPN’s inconsistency over how it dealt with the two incidents.

    Also, boobs…

    1. Soave doesn’t misunderstand the point. He fully understands the point and further, he knows that he doesn’t have any sort of cogent rebuttal.

      So instead he chooses misdirection – fighting a strawman argument on ground more favorable to him.

      It’s called mendacity and it is what Soave is.

    2. And where did huckabee, trump, etc. invoke the first amendment? No where.

      Is it a firing offense to call the president a white racist?

      It sure would have been a firing offense to call Obama a black racist.

  4. I don’t understand the point of this article?

    1. As always, the point is to rip off Crusty without a HT.

      1. Crusty enjoys abuse.

    2. I don’t understand the point of this article?

      Robby was desperate to use “The Real Boobs Are _____”, as it is the finest piece of literary-repartee he’s ever penned

      I know, its embarrassing for everyone involved here. Just look away.

      1. Ah, I just got the joke. I rescind all my comments. Bravo Robby.

  5. The social media mobs are currently pillorying Travis for his crass comment, and deservedly so

    I just can’t believe a shock-jock made a crass joke. No one could have forseen this and her tears are entirely understandable.

    1. Hey, someone needs to make money off this simple-minded malarkey, and apparently that person is Clay Travis.

      1. But……..people still actually WATCH ESPN? Other than a live ball game I mean.

  6. Also, agree or disagree it wasn’t a particularly bizarre rant. Can you at least argue against his ideas instead of trying to use language that attempts to frame a person as mentally unfit in some way.

  7. Hill, a SportsCenter host and woman of color

    What color?

    1. My money’s on pinko.

      1. I mean that in both the political and religious senses, Praise “Bob”.

        1. They do go well together. Got to have something good to chase down those shots.

    1. I wonder if ‘knockers’ would’ve been more appropriate.

  8. called President Trump a white supremacist, drawing the ire of White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders, who branded it a “firing offense.” Eventually, Trump himself tweeted that ESPN should “apologize for untruth!”

    Sanders doubled down at a Friday press briefing, saying, “ESPN has been hypocritical, they should hold anchors to a fair and consistent standard.”

    Ok, this whole spat is so fucking Jr. High, I can’t believe these people make more money than I do.

    1. The real problem here is social media. Thirty years ago, Schilling and Hill would be able to spout whatever inane things popped in their head and no one would really bat an eye because their comments would just be heard by their friends or colleagues, and most likely shrugged off. Stuff like Twatter and Facederp provides them with the tools to make themselves look like asses to millions.

      No shit that ESPN has a double standard going here, but the whole thing, as you said, is rendered infantile by the atomizing force of social media.

  9. Tangerine Dreamer, legalize me,
    Kudos and backslaps are waiting for thee;
    Sounds of the Breittards, heard in the day,
    Lull’d by the media have all passed away!

  10. What color?*

    Homely.

    ZING!!!

    *It should be “which color.” Get it together, Diane.

  11. Otherwise, neither the First Amendment nor boobs are relevant here.

    Jesus, who wrote this post?

    *scrolls up*

    Robby, boobs are ALWAYS relevant.

    1. Solid C cup, nice bounce.

      1. Give ma a C! A BOUNCY C!

    2. someone did mention boobs. who mentioned first amendment? No one except for the fake libertarian.

  12. You’re right. This is not a First Amendment issue; ESPN is not (yet, anyway) a government actor and the government should not get involved. However, ESPN has chosen to make itself a platform for liberal and SJW politics and one is not a “boob” for addressing and objecting to that.

    ESPN is hypocritical on this issue because it pretends to respect its commentators’ rights to express their views. But of course it does not. Hill’s comments defaming Trump were far more egregious than Schilling’s comments about unisex bathrooms. But of course, Schilling’s comments went against the (largely black) NBA, and Hill is black (and female). ESPN didn’t give a damn if white folks bitched about them dumping Schilling but were not about to confront blacks on its panels and in the NFL and NBA had they fired Hill. Racial (even racist) politics, pure and simple, controlled the day.

    Hill is entitled to her views (uninformed and histrionic as they are). So is Schilling. Sauce for the goose: ESPN can’t excuse disparate treatment here other than on the basis of “we are willing to give voice to liberals but not to anyone to the right of John McCain”. Which probably pretty much sums up ESPN’s point of view.

    Nobody can force ESPN to in fact maintain an “open mike” for both sides of any political issue, so I like many (uncounted) others am simply turning ESPN off. I turn to sports for entertainment. When I want to hear liberal, SJW tripe I turn on MSN or CNN. I never want to hear liberal, SJW tripe.

    1. Like I mentioned in the AM links, the Hollywood/media complex has taken on all the trappings of a political entity while operating under the guise of private mega-corporations. This is what makes their objections to Citizens United so disingenuous, but what’s telling here is that Trump and his cronies are resorting to simply bitching about it rather than leveraging the regulatory apparatus against the very people who keep demanding its ever-growing expansion. This is a pretty good indication that Trump’s lack of political acumen is going to pull him down in the long run, because he either can’t or won’t use the enemies’ weapons against them now that he’s in office.

      1. @unrepentant curmudgeon @red rocks
        I think you two boobs might be mistaking “politics” for popularity. There’s a reason Clinton won the popular vote but not the electoral college — she was substantially more popular with more people than the president. And if you adjust for the fact the she was more popular with the infinitely larger group of people that don’t bother to vote but do watch television and buy things, suddenly ESPN’s “politics” will make more sense.

        Also: using the regulatory apparatus against this? What planet are you on?

        1. Right. NASCAR, football, boxing, hockey, SEC college athletics– all things overwhelmingly enjoyed by poncy left wing pajama boys instead of icky right-wing Confederate-flag-waving boob-loving chaw-spitting deploranazis! ESPN is totes right to take note of the political inclinations of the majority of its audience and act accordingly.

          1. “right-wing Confederate-flag-waving boob-loving chaw-spitting deploranazis”

            STOP! STOP! .. you had me at boob-loving!

          2. You a fellow chaw dawg bro?

        2. “And if you adjust for the fact the she was more popular with the infinitely larger group of people that don’t bother to vote but do watch television and buy things,”

          She was, eh?

          And your proof for this is what, exactly?

          1. Young people. HRC support and democratic sympathies more generally are vastly more popular amongst young people than are Republican/right-leaning tendencies. Unfortunately for Democrats, young people don’t vote. They do however spend profligately. ESPN is just tending its marketing demographics.

            1. That sounds rather anecdotal… Also, ESPN is hemorrhaging market share badly. They might want to rethink their whole business model, tbh.

        3. I think you two boobs might be mistaking “politics” for popularity

          Considering I didn’t mention anything about this, your response seems to be more of a personal bugaboo than anything relevant.

          Also: using the regulatory apparatus against this? What planet are you on?

          If you don’t see an issue with mega-corporations assuming the trappings of quasi-government entities, especially when pushing progressive political bugaboos, then you might be a dumbshit.

        4. Also, fuckin lol at this milennialism:

          “infinitely larger group of people”

          Stop. Voter turnout was at a 20-year low last year. If people won’t turn out to vote for you, you’re not as popular as you think you are.

    2. so I like many (uncounted) others am simply turning ESPN off.

      I never turned ESPN on in the first place. Fuck those progtard assholes.

      1. Well maybe if you dressed up, put on a little cologne….

        You know, make some kind of effort. Then maybe ESPN would get turned on.

        1. Nah, just pull down your pants. It’s what she’s gonna end up judgin’ ya by anyway.

    3. The other African-American anchors wouldn’t go on if Hill was suspended. That was ESPN’s problem. The other white anchors didn’t care about Schilling. It is about who gets support.

  13. Am I supposed to be thinking about Sarah Huckabee Sanders’ boobs? I’ll be out of my bunk.

    1. You know why they call her that? Because lefty looks like Bernie Sanders and righty looks like Mike Huckabee.

      1. I knew a girl once who had one boob from mom’s side of the family and one from dad’s. Never met mom so I don’t know which was which.

      1. Oh gawd! I wish I had some art talent. I could have some fun with that pic.

        1. Not my line but as someone else once said:

          “that’s asking a hell of a lot of vertical stripes”

      2. Political pressure and other elements of Trump and Comey here.

  14. Alt text: See? I can look both of you in the eye at the same time. How’s that for credibility?

  15. This came out of nowhere, unnerving Baldwin and prompting her to end the segment early.

    Edward R. Murrow wouldn’t have got the vapors from a reference to a dame’s yams, I’ll tell you that much. Cronkite wouldn’t have run for his safe space at the mere mention of some broad’s cans, that’s for sure. Hemingway would have withstood an out of the blue remark about a gal’s milk bottles. Rather could have handled talk of blouse bunnies.

    1. Who’s got the balls, the BALLS, to just reach out and grab them? You know who.

      1. Well, they do let him, after all.

      2. There are few things more fun than when the old lady gets her guns out!

    2. Fist, don’t you live in FL? Are you ready for Gov. Huckabee? Not to mention Sen. Scott.

        1. YOU SHUT YOUR FUCKING MOUTH

          Assuming you mouth the words you’re typing.

          1. Crusty mouths god damn near everything.

        2. Philly is a fine city. The cradle of our revolution deserves respect.

          1. If it’s so great why did they name it Filthacrapia?

            1. How the Irish pronounce it is irrelevant.

          2. No city named after gay incest deserves respect.

    3. It shouldn’t have taken her by surprise, because Travis said the exact same thing on his blog yesterday.

  16. Congrats, Soave.

    Virtue signalled.

    1. It must work out to more action for him when it’s his night in the barrel.

  17. The problem is a society where what one can say in public depends on being a Designated Victim.

    1. Promote this Xe!

  18. Why is there a picture of Sarah Huckabee for this article, the writers at reason should have put up a pictures with boobs for more clicks and I am talking MAXIMUM BOOBAGE! It’s like we gotta teach these boys and gals at reason how to get this done.

    Oh I don’t care about the looney chick, I ignore all commentary by woman when I watch football anyway.

  19. Here is a fun addition to this story that has shocked the nation (take a backseat, hurricane losers):

    Clay Travis?Verified account @ClayTravis

    CNN is so offended that they already called me and asked if I could come back on Monday. Too perfect.

    Mind you, some women – and some men on behalf of all women – are outraged!

    What are those same people seemingly not outraged by? This: Hillary Clinton Thinks Women Voted Against Her Because of ‘Fathers and Husbands and Boyfriends and Male Employers’

    1. Wow. Hillary has lost all perspective. I always thought she had a sharp, if evil, mind. Now, someone needs to talk to her. Where the hell is Huma?

      1. Where the hell is Huma?

        Takin’ care of Carlos Danger as the Prophet told her to do.

    2. “As Hillary Clinton talks about her book What Happened, one question that keeps coming up is why she lost the 2016 election.”

      Only among those who inhabit an alternate reality.

  20. “Clay Travis”

    /waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaank

  21. Before reading any of the comments, I’m going to go out on a limb and say that nobody actually wants ESPN to fire the Trump-hater.

    They are just playing “sauce for the goose”. They are tired of a world in which espousing any sort of traditional values will get you fired, and they are simply saying it is time the other side was judged by their own standards.

    If we didn’t live in a world where saying men should pee in the men’s room would get you pilloried on the public square, maybe their reaction would be different. But we do. In today’s world, suggesting that women might be better communicators than men might just get you fired… or if you say it wrong, it might leave you unemployable, with an army of cyber-terrorists tracking your every move, threatening any would-be employer to ensure that you are never again able to earn a living.

    This is what they are really reacting to, not anything that Hill actually said. It is their version of saying “you see how stupid this stuff you are doing is?”

  22. Hey Robby. In case you missed it, you pulled a Robby:

    The social media mobs are currently pillorying Travis for his crass comment, and deservedly so.

    Why exactly does he deserve to be pilloried? It is a joke. A fairly pedestrian joke of a sort of self-deprecatingly frat-boy nature, perfectly at home in his demographic. It also might give a wink to the cynically cleavaged up sportscasting women of ESPN.

    So why should he be shunned and ostracized from society?

    Why does this judgement from the author on Travis’ joke belong in the article? To what end? How does “I hate that guy too” help frame the argument? And why would you have such a reaction? Surely this is not the sort of comment that would have you clutching at your pearls in real life, is it? So why clutch at them in an article?

    1. “It also might give a wink to the cynically cleavaged up sportscasting women of ESPN.”

      That was the tongue in cheek I thought he was going for.

      For fun, I type in “ESPN Female Sportscasters,” in Duckduck images. It was plastered with hooters.

  23. She should be fired not for what she wrote but because it’s bad for business. The same reason Kepearnick can’t get hired. Liberals are not the main audience for sports.

    1. But MUH VIRTUE!

      I read someone liken today’s push for trans-rights (what ever the hell that means) to the Civil rights era of the 60’s. These idiots really think they’re something.

    2. Pretty much. Who wants to pay millions for a ratings drag with waning skills?

  24. She should be fired not for what she wrote but because it’s bad for business. The same reason Kepearnick can’t get hired. Liberals are not the main audience for sports.

  25. “and deservedly so”

    If anyone was wondering why so many of my fellow Gen-Y/Gen-Z white cis-het dude brethren use libertarianism as a “pipeline” to the Alt-Right: THIS shit is why.

    The Left’s biggest mistake was fooling itself into thinking “That’s not funny!” is somehow a debate-winning phrase.

  26. Robby,
    You should at least watch the clip before you write an article about it. Travis said he didn’t think she should be fired. How did you miss that? He said he thought ESPN had set a bad precedent and would be hypocrites if they didn’t after firing Schilling, but stated outright he didn’t think she should be fired. Keep up the great work!

    1. You should at least watch the clip before you write an article about it. …. Keep up the great work!

      does. not. compute

      1. Please adjust your sarcasm detector.

      2. “does. not. compute”

        Self refutation is hard and we all appreciate Robby’s yeoman efforts at it.

  27. “Evidently that was the point Travis was attempting to make during his bizarre rant: since ESPN fired Curt Schilling for making anti-trans bathroom comments, it should be consistent and also discipline Hill.”

    No. Travis said neither Schilling nor Hill should have been punished. So no need to apologize to Travis in the subtitle above. He gets it just fine.

    1. Article by Clay Travis.

      1. Nothing about tits at all. Boring.

        1. No tits? What’s the fucking point then?

  28. As I get older, I find it harder to understand why people talk about sports. We have scoreboards which are the ultimate arbiter of pretty much any opinion that matters.

    There is no question which will not be resolved by the end of the season.

    1. Tell that to the Democratic party… They can’t seem to leave their safe space long enough to check the score board.

      1. I don’t give a shit about ESPN or Hill because I never really liked her but you fucks are the snowflakes for crying like like bitches because so chick called that scumbag Trump a white supremacist. You fuckers love BLM more than liberals. It’s like crack for you fuckers. That’s all Hannity can talk about it. And SWJ comes out of y’alls mouths every other word. Jesus fucking christ.

        1. Memory Hole meltdown–go guzzle a gallon of Ripple, you fragile hysteric.

        2. Trump literally received an award for ‘Diversity’ in New York City, a deep blue city inside of a deep blue state.

          Being white ? White Supremacist

          Trump is an asshole. He’s just not that particular type of asshole. Allowing someone to say things like that about a sitting President at a sports event on national TV, no matter which tribe you’re in:

          A: doesn’t make a lot of sense.
          B: just goes to show how classy you and your employer are.
          C: looks even worse when you’ve already fired someone for something far less egregious.
          E: goes to show what people now think it takes to be a ‘hero’

          1. Trump is an asshole. He’s just not that particular type of asshole.

            Can I get that on a bumper sticker?

            1. I had a t shirt made that boldly admonishes ‘Have a Trumptastic Day!’ It’s a great way to politely give the middle finger to progtards everywhere I go.

        3. You’d think all those broadcast network types, who just a few short years ago were working directly with Trump might not appreciate the implication that they were just fine with a ‘white supremacist.’

          But apparently these things can only cut one way.

  29. The controversy is not about Jemele Hill per se, but about ESPN’s hypocrisy. Firing one person for political remarks and not the other.

  30. Sanders should be fired for violating ethics rules that prohibit executive branch officials from seeking to influence private business employment decisions and these Republicans dumb as fuck hypocrites because Trump called Pres Obama a racist when he was working on his fake as fuck reality TV show.

    1. MUH RUSSIA

    2. “Fake as fuck”

      Fuckimg isn’t fake.

    3. “Fake as fuck”

      Fuckimg isn’t fake.

  31. RE: “Clay Travis, a sports radio host known for his incendiary right-wing views, believes in only two things, ‘the First Amendment and boobs.'”

    Isn’t that three things?

  32. So Robby is saying that CNN chick has fake boobs?

  33. I don’t think it’s about if Hill should be fired. (That is Disney’s prerogative) It’s more about does Disney equally apply it’s standards to its employees across the board. It would appear from the outside looking in, that they do not. “Some pigs are more equal than others.”

  34. The only issue I see here is that in order to boycott sponsors of Disney products, it is necessary to watch Disney products, which encourages the sponsors of Disney products, etc, etc.

    That a left wing broadcaster has a double standard is not exactly news.

  35. I think it is fine for Sanders and Trump to express displeasure with her statements. Anything beyond that is inappropriate government coercion. I also think calling anyone a white supremacist who has not proclaimed white supremacy, or who has actually renounced white supremacy, should be fired. “White supremacist” has become the white equivalent of the n-word and should be taboo.

  36. “The social media mobs are currently pillorying Travis for his crass comment, and deservedly so.”

    Well then why aren’t the social media mobs trying to get the cheerleaders removed, they have maximum boobage and shorts/skirts so tight they leave little to the imagination. Bending over, smiling and shaking their pom poms while performing seductive dance routines. How is declaring the love of boobs by a guy some kind of surprise. Will the SJWs get the wonder bra banned because some hetero male out there might like what they see???

    1. That was the irony of it all. You could literally see cleavage from the person who is suddenly offended. Lady, he may worship the boob god, but you’re a damn priestess at the temple collecting tithes.

  37. Both people have the right to say they stated their opinion. She can get mad because he spoke like a horny 12 year old. He can plan it off as playful banter. ESPN can look like boobs and fire a decent guy. There is no need or even concern of the government to intercede in any of this, thanks for the article.

  38. But in a libertarian society, ESPN COULD fire her for saying that, or for any other reason, right?

  39. Article fails to include the right of Trump to win tens of millions from ESPN or Ms. Hill for her obvious libel and slander, arguing that Trump is the equal or worse of Hitler.

    That travesty of a decision, that holds that public figures have a higher burden of proof than private figures, obliterates the Equal protection clause and is a driving force that permits people to call for Trump’s assassination and lets Ms. Hill get away with those comments.

    ‘….But they did so much worse back in the day….’. Back in the day we had Slavery, women could not vote and we did not have the 14th Amendment.

  40. The first amendment issue is stupid. If personal political issues are stated on air it is when you are at your job. You in no way have the right to express your own unfiltered opinion at your place of work especially when it might damage our employer. On your own time, say whatever you want.

    The issue here is that Hill expressed the opinion that ESPN wants to push. ESPN has proven that by its response to past similar cases. I assume that ESPN has calculated the potential damage as is fine with it.

    What isn’t being said is that Hill is a low talent employee. Sure, she is attractive. But the show that she is on is basically unwatchable and was even before she spewed her Trump hate. Hey, I don’t like the guy either but there is little actual evidence that he is racist. So basically, Hill made an uniformed, inaccurate political statement which is exactly the same type of statements she makes on sports. Why are people surprised?

  41. The whole point of all this is that the two comments aren’t even close to being comparable. Some guy stating an obvious fact that men like breasts/boobage to that of someone slandering another is way off. No one says ESPN must fire Hill, they just gave an opinion based on actions ESPN has taken against others. They fired others for a lot less, they just had the wrong type opinion than ESPN sjw platform. The political slant is obvious and people are making it known.

  42. #IBelieveInBoobs

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.