In between the first and last statement, Greener lists a group of people who have made just as bad statements as Thomas, but who still have work. People like Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, and Pat Buchanan. The only difference is that those people (according to Greener) haven't made negative remarks about Jews, just other groups. And then Greener laments the lack of a "free" press.
Something that Mr. Greener of course decides not to mention is the numerous high profile personalities who did get in trouble and did suffer career wise from making bigoted comments, such as Michael Richards and George Allen. He falsely present an image of America where only Jewish critics get in trouble and everyone else gets away with it. But nothing could be further from the truth. It's especially ironic when you consider that Pat Buchanan has in fact made anti-Semitic comments. Just ask the ADL. I guess Mr. Greener couldn't be bothered to do his research before he published.
You would expect a liberal paper like the HP and an (I assume) liberal blogger like Mr. Greener would be happy that bigots like Thomas are being forced to face the consequences of their actions, as treating all people with respect and kindness is a liberal value. But rather than ask why the people he listed haven't be forced to face consequence, as another HP blogger does, he complains that personalities in America aren't "free" to criticize Israel and the Jews. This leads to two questions:
1. If we are not free to criticize Israel and Jews, who is preventing us from doing that? Greener, of course, does not say, but I think we can all tell what he is implying, as he goes to great pains to give the impressions only people who criticize Jews get in trouble. He clearly suggests Jews are responsible for the fall of Helen Thomas and will do the same to anyone else who criticizes them. Which in turn references the myth of "Jewish control" over the media. I may be reading into his words, but I don't think so.
2. Why doesn't Greener seem to have a problem with Thomas' comments? He makes the now tortured "free speech" argument, as if the First Amendment requires us to let Thomas say whatever she wants without consequences. But rather than say, "Thomas' fate was deserved, let's make sure these other bigots meet the same kind", he complains that only anti-Jewish bigots are not longer free to spread their hate.
Sorry, Mr. Greener, but we do have a free press in this country. And that means we are free to denounce hate speech wherever we find it, even when it's from a mere "old lady".