Hate crimes and the radical right

[hyphenate]

First of all, I totally understand the 1st amendment rights, but I also know that a person can be prosecuted for hate crimes by speaking out against a group or an individual in such a way that "hate" is the main issue, and not just stating facts, but stirring up emotions. I don't know if "hate crimes" are federal or state, but that might pertain here.

If such speech is considered a hate crime and not just someone stating their own opinion, how is it that people like Rush, Pat Robertson, Fred Phelps, Ann Coulter and others like them can get away with saying even half the things they say on national radio and TV?

When one of them speaks up about a portion of the population, the comments they make are sure signs of hate, designed to stir up their ethically challenged base. So why can't they be arrested for those comments, or, at the very least, be sued for slander or libel?

Or am I talking apples and oranges? Is there something that I am missing?

[unpossibles]

1. I believe it's a state law

and since they are on national air it's not the same jurisdiction? hell, I have no idea.

Honestly, I believe the ACLU and others fight to protect hateful speech, and I am fine with that. I think hate crimes go further than just speaking, and generally are violent or inciting violence.

[rudeboy666]

2. Free Speech (even for the Dumb!)

As long as there is no libel or incitement to violence (e.g. screaming fire in a crowded theater), freedom of speech is free.

Of course, where does hate speech fit into all of this?

Being annoyed (or even hurt) by some particular type of speech is not enough to restrict free speech. Even if you claim that certain types of speech creates an 'environment' where some idiot might be encouraged to commit violence is not enough to curtail free speech.