Slate ran an interview with Louis CK on June 17 in which CK defends Tracy Morgan.

There’s a lot of times when I let myself channel bad ideas as a way to do comedy. I think it’s something that’s a healthy thing to do, honestly. And I think the person who really fucked people up and hurt people with Tracy’s words was whoever took it out of that Nashville club and put it on the national stage— whoever called Huffington Post or whoever started this shit, and said, “Guess what Tracy Morgan said,” and announced it to the rest of the world. He wasn’t trying to say it to the rest of the world. So when I read stuff like, How are gay people going to feel when they read this? Well they didn’t have to read it! They weren’t part of that show. Maybe there were gay people there who were laughing. You don’t fucking know. Nobody gets to say that they represent anybody and they’re offended on behalf of the whole world.

You can see this shit really bothers me. I didn’t carefully inspect what he said. I heard some of it, and it made me laugh. I didn’t get the context, but I have to defend it, because if I was in his role, if I was in his situation, which I might be someday—which I already am for having said something on his behalf—I would want someone to step forward and say something. This is a freedom that I live off of. I think, whatever, if Tracy made a mistake, he certainly didn’t deserve all of this. And I don’t know him well, but he’s a good guy. So I’m using that judgment, of just, hey, I met him and he’s a good guy. And I get a sense of him as a father, and there’s no way he would stab his kid.

It’s a dumb thing to take at face value. You’d have to be a moron. And if you do, you are not allowed to laugh at any more jokes. You are not allowed to laugh at any jokes that have any violence or negative feelings attached to them, ironically or otherwise. I think there’s a lot of hypocrisy in that. If anybody thinks that what he said is true and there’s no comedy in it, don’t come to my shows. I’ve said to many audiences that I think you shouldn’t rape someone unless you have a good reason, like you want to fuck them and they won’t let you. That’s worse than what he said! And I didn’t wink and say, just kidding. I just said it.

And there’s another article, this time in the Atlantic, by a senior editor, Ta-Nehisi Coates, in which he quotes from the same Slate interview then proceeds to dissect the matter and offer many of the same points that others have made on the issue. It’s rather murky, but Coates provides a clip or two of Louis CK’s act, then tries (we think) to differentiate between Morgan and CK.

One of the commenters on this magazine opined that Louis CK’s material possibly wouldn’t be subject to criticism or persecution like Morgan was “because of the caliber of the usage and the thought that went into it, its purpose.” Well, buckle up, buttercup, and get an eyeful of the comments that follow Coates’ “defense” of Morgan. There were 345 at last count and the commenters– surprise!– say a lot of the same things about humor, about jokes, about boundaries, that were said about the Morgan incident… only this time, it’s about Louis CK.

The mob is rather like the gang that’s camped outside of, say, Frankenstein’s house with pitchforks and torches and someone runs up and yells, “HEY! Over here! There’s a werewolf!” and they all set off in that direction with their pitchforks and torches.

Like we said, if you think Louis CK or any other respected comedian is immune, because the “caliber of the usage” or the “thought” or the “purpose” that goes into the material, you are wrong. And if you think you’re immune, you’re wrong, too.