CNN promptly fired “Rick’s List” host Rick Sanchez after a bizarre satellite radio rant in which he accused “The Daily Show” host John Stewart of being a “bigot” (presumably because he often picks on Sanchez, who is a Cuban-American) and insinuated that both Stewart and bigwigs at CNN were not inclined to give Sanchez a fair shake because they are Jews.Of course he had to go.

The question is, how should the network have handled the firing? It opted for traditional: a straightforward statement that Sanchez wasn’t a CNN employee any more, and a gracious note of thanks and good wishes:

“Rick Sanchez is no longer with the company. We thank Rick for his years of service and we wish him well.“

Blogger Sam Rubin, however, feels that CNN “blew it.” Here is the statement Rubin feels CNN should have made, taking a stand and being aggressively critical while showing Sanchez the door:

“In light of Rick Sanchez’s radio interview, we have fired him. Sanchez’s views, which in our view, are clearly anti-Semitic, demand an immediate response, and our response is this, we have asked him to leave CNN immediately. We object strongly to Sanchez’s statement that Jon Stewart is a bigot. We also object to Sanchez’s statement that the Jewish management at CNN would not advance his career. CNN’s management is not characterized by race nor religion. The company that Rick Sanchez described is not our company. We believe in freedom of expression, and we do not care if opinions expressed on our airwaves are not politically correct. We do object when our own employees simply misstate the facts, and allow their own egos to cloud their thinking.”

I don’t violently object to Rubin’s statement. It could be worded a little bit more precisely. Some of my objection to it is that it states the obvious: Sanchez was fired because CNN didn’t like his comments, and anti-Semitic statements, like blatantly racist statements, are the third rail of public life. The first two lines, then, are unnecessary. So is the third: CNN would never have fired Sanchez for opining that Jon Stewart, an employee at another network, is a bigot. That he is not a bigot isn’t a “fact;” who knows what Sanchez’s definition of a bigot is. Chris Matthews, Keith Olbermann, Glenn Beck and other talking heads call various public figures bigots, with varying levels of logic and sophistication. Calling a comedian who mocks Sanchez a bigot may be dumb, and may be unfair, but it isn’t a firing offense. It doesn’t belong in the CNN statement.

The main problem, however, is that the statement kicks Sanchez when he’s already down and bleeding. CNN doesn’t need to defend itself: doing so simultaneously makes Sanchez’s gaffe worse and gives his comment more validity than it deserves. There is a reason why companies fire employees with bland “He’s gone; he did some good work while he was here; we wish him well someplace else” statements: most executives have messed up royally themselves at one time or another, and know how it feels. Firing an employee sends a perfectly effective message, and there is no need to humiliate, savage or insult the guy in the process. The Golden Rule applies. And when Sanchez has to fire some employee in the future, he’ll remember that CNN gave him a break.

When Rubin gets fired, he’ll understand.