Wednesday, May 23, 2007
Don Imus and The Prodigal Son
A lot has happened in the past several months that is certainly worthy of debate on the blogosphere. So far I've resisted all urges to engage in anything other than reading the actual news... and I can't exaggerate the significance of the inner peace I've found in abstaining from such debates.
There is a great life lesson in one such event that occurred, and I hope my observations transcend political ideologies. My favorite morning show, (the only MSNBC show I watched), is gone forever. I loved the show because it is where I learned the human side of many public figures I often disagree with politically.
Actually, the Don Imus story is hardly a tragedy for him. He is sober. He is a good husband and a loving father. He is wealthy. He is generous. He is loyal. And now he knows who his true friends really are.
Ever read the parable of the Prodigal Son? A central part of that story is that as soon as the young man's money ran out, all those "friends" he enjoyed and who benefited from his wealth disappeared from his life.
In Imus's case, his wealth was his medium. His show was popular and therefore many powerful, well known journalists, executives, writers, authors, publishers, bloggers, musicians, companies, politicians- Republican and Democrat- eagerly made extreme efforts to be counted as his friend. I imagine Russert, Matthews, Gregory, all the execs at CBS and MSNBC have long understood his grouchy demeanor and his contrived bigotry (of which he was constantly called out on by his side kick, Charles McCord.) What's more revealing is just how fast all of Imus's supposed friends and business associates publicly disassociated themselves with his show, as if they would rather be dead than stand by the man who contributed far more to their success and popularity than he received from them.
There is no good reason for Imus to say many of the things he has said. But anyone who watched or listened to his program for more than a week or two could understand that nothing he said was ever meant to be taken personally, literally or seriously. Nothing, that is, but his devotion to charities and to his family and friends.
Maybe we shouldn't allows shows like his. The irony is rich. The very people who claim to be advocates of free speech by defending pornography, flag burning and other culturally derisive forms of expression permanently censure one of their own. Were hundreds of thousands calling for his head? Were religious leaders/organizations petitioning for his dismissal? (Though I'm sure no one would condone it.) No. The Rutgers team asked for a retraction and apology and got it. What about CBS and MSNBC? They allowed themselves to be bullied by a few talented shakedown artists.
Imus was/is careless with his words, and it cost him his job. But he has integrity. He took full responsibility for his words. And I'll bet the girls from Rutgers not only forgive him, but can count themselves fortunate to be called his friends.
There is a great life lesson in one such event that occurred, and I hope my observations transcend political ideologies. My favorite morning show, (the only MSNBC show I watched), is gone forever. I loved the show because it is where I learned the human side of many public figures I often disagree with politically.
Actually, the Don Imus story is hardly a tragedy for him. He is sober. He is a good husband and a loving father. He is wealthy. He is generous. He is loyal. And now he knows who his true friends really are.
Ever read the parable of the Prodigal Son? A central part of that story is that as soon as the young man's money ran out, all those "friends" he enjoyed and who benefited from his wealth disappeared from his life.
In Imus's case, his wealth was his medium. His show was popular and therefore many powerful, well known journalists, executives, writers, authors, publishers, bloggers, musicians, companies, politicians- Republican and Democrat- eagerly made extreme efforts to be counted as his friend. I imagine Russert, Matthews, Gregory, all the execs at CBS and MSNBC have long understood his grouchy demeanor and his contrived bigotry (of which he was constantly called out on by his side kick, Charles McCord.) What's more revealing is just how fast all of Imus's supposed friends and business associates publicly disassociated themselves with his show, as if they would rather be dead than stand by the man who contributed far more to their success and popularity than he received from them.
There is no good reason for Imus to say many of the things he has said. But anyone who watched or listened to his program for more than a week or two could understand that nothing he said was ever meant to be taken personally, literally or seriously. Nothing, that is, but his devotion to charities and to his family and friends.
Maybe we shouldn't allows shows like his. The irony is rich. The very people who claim to be advocates of free speech by defending pornography, flag burning and other culturally derisive forms of expression permanently censure one of their own. Were hundreds of thousands calling for his head? Were religious leaders/organizations petitioning for his dismissal? (Though I'm sure no one would condone it.) No. The Rutgers team asked for a retraction and apology and got it. What about CBS and MSNBC? They allowed themselves to be bullied by a few talented shakedown artists.
Imus was/is careless with his words, and it cost him his job. But he has integrity. He took full responsibility for his words. And I'll bet the girls from Rutgers not only forgive him, but can count themselves fortunate to be called his friends.
Comments:
<< Home
Good column. While I watch MSNBC most of the time the hole left by Don Imus is apparent. It is painful to watch MSNBC attempt to fill the morning time slot. Imus's value was indeed talking with those who one might not agree with in a manner that brought out their private side. It certainly led me to change my opinion about some politicians both positive and negatively.
# posted by 
: 5/24/2007 07:14:00 AM
: 5/24/2007 07:14:00 AM
Very nice column. Those who wish peace and equality for all seem so filled with hate. Imus screwed up. Period. Where is the Christian forgiveness and the offer of redemption? Penance is one thing damnation is another. Lighten up people. WWJD?
# posted by : 5/24/2007 08:40:00 AM
: 5/24/2007 08:40:00 AM
Excellent article. As a loyal Imus viewer on MSNBC, I, too, miss the Iman and his Merry Band. The tragedy, (or is it the triumph?) in this situation is the betrayal of so many "friends" who benefitted from their appearance on his broadcast. I say triumph, because how many people know who their friends are, and where they will be if called upon to express their loyalty? The displays of so many weasels who crawled out from under their respective rocks to condemn the man who did everything in his power to correct his mis-speak has made me discontinue financial support for some politicians, stop reading some self-important bloggers, and turn off the tube when certain commentators want to influence me with their opinions. One wonders how they can look themselves in the mirror when they brush their teeth in the morning after all that disassociation fell from their self-righteous mouths?
I was angry then, and I'm still angry now--Imus demonstrated sincere regret at his statements, apologized to the injured parties and yet where are the so-called "Reverends" when it's time for forgiveness and opportunity for redemption? What they accomplished was removing a forum for open, honest debate on racism in this country--and by polarizing this issue, set race relations back a generation or more.
Bless you for your objectivity and thanks for the opportunity to continue my rant which I plan on doing until Imus returns to the airwaves....
I was angry then, and I'm still angry now--Imus demonstrated sincere regret at his statements, apologized to the injured parties and yet where are the so-called "Reverends" when it's time for forgiveness and opportunity for redemption? What they accomplished was removing a forum for open, honest debate on racism in this country--and by polarizing this issue, set race relations back a generation or more.
Bless you for your objectivity and thanks for the opportunity to continue my rant which I plan on doing until Imus returns to the airwaves....
Imus is a jerk, but that's hardly news--he's been a jerk for years. More to the point, he was an entertainer, that was his shtick, and that was what he was under contract to do. The very idea that Al Sharpton has any moral authority, or grounds upon which to lecture anyone, is laughable.
# posted by : 5/31/2007 09:19:00 PM
: 5/31/2007 09:19:00 PM
I am trying to get a conservative digg alternative going called GOP Hub (GOPHub.com). Anything you can do to help with this effort would be awesome. Plus feel free to submit any articles you write here on your blog :). Take care and have a great week!
# posted by : 7/08/2007 11:13:00 PM
: 7/08/2007 11:13:00 PM
Why I will not vote for Obama:
1. Are we likely to get GOOD CHANGES in Energy policy from an Obama administration?
Answer: NO. Why Not?
Because: Obama voted FOR the Cheney Energy Bill (H.R. 6) in 2005.
(which enabled the nuke industry to begin planning to build 29 new nukes (one of them in North Carolina.)
- after 30 years of no new nukes being built because the banks wouldn't loan the money - too risky.
The Cheney Energy Bill solved that problem for the nuke industry by guaranteeing taxpayer payback of any of the nuke loans that default ... (with the risk of default rated by the Congressional Budget Office at 50% or greater).
Because: Obama has been IN with the nuke industry for decades. Excelon Corp. of Illinois is the largest nuke operator on earth - ( they own the nuclear power plants in Illinois and they own Con-Ed in NY state). Excelon has been one of Obama's largest contributors since his earliest days in politics.
Because: Obama would not even be IN the race for president IF he was not HEAVILY SUPPORTED by the nuke industry. GE (2nd largest corporation on the planet) & Westinghouse are planning to build many of those nukes.
GE owns NBC & MSNBC. Westinghouse owns CBS. That's the reason "the Mainstreams Media" are PUSHING Obama for President/ slamming & smearing the Clintons. ABSENT BILLIONS of dollars worth of FREE Pro-Obama Advertising/Propaganda provided by NBC/MSNBC/and CBS Obama would not have gotten past the New Hampshire primary.
2. Are we likely to get GOOD CHANGES in the ECONOMY?
Answer: It doesn't look good. Obama's financial advisors include the followng people:
JEFFREY LIEBMAN: SOCIAL SECURITY: In a 2005 policy paper Liebman advocated a mix of benefit cuts, tax increases and mandatory personal accounts.
DAVID CUTLER: HEALTHCARE: He Says High Health Care Costs are Good.
AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: RICH GETTING RICHER, EVERYBODY ELSE GETTING POORER:
The stagnation of middle- and working-class incomes, and the anxiety this has generated, is, he says, a most pressing problem, but policymakers must be mindful about trying to address its root cause, which Goolsbee says is "radically increased returns to skill." ( i.e. College degrees are paying off more & more --- which is true, BUT Certainly DOES NOT account for the rise of the super rich, nor the increasing poverty of everyone else.)
(Evidently, Goolsbee's not old enough to remember the beginning of that Income Inequality, or to recognize THE CAUSE. It began in 1981. THE CAUSE of it was and is that Reagan cut the top tax rate DOWN from 70% to the low 30% s, AND Corporations all over America BEGAN instituting "THE TWO-TIER WAGE STRUCTURE'. i.e. Pay the people at the top a LOT MORE, Pay Everybody Else a LOT LESS. (If you searched old newspaper archives from the early 1980s you would find newspaper articles about the sudden appearance of the Two-Tier Wage Structure.)
3. Are we likely to get GOOD CHANGES in Foreign Policy?
Answer: Not Likely.
Among a dozen or so Foreign Policy Advisors the most "senior" advisor is:
Zbigniew Brzezinski. Former National Security Advisor to President Carter. Using the CIA & Billions of dollars, he ginned up a War in Afghanistan .... seeking as he said to "give the Soviet Union its own Vietnam.".
He Created the Taliban and Al Queda/ JIHAD/madrassa brainwashing schools for that purpose. Supported the dictator Pol Pol who massacred millions of Cambodian villagers. When asked, if in hindsight, considering that Al Queda eventually attacked America, and Pol Pot slaughtered millions - IF he would change anything he had done .... Zbig answered NO, he was satisfied with the results.
Electing Obama President is not likely to reassure the rest of the world that the U.S. is going to cease having an insane foreign policy; is likely to put Russia on an even more nervous hair trigger than they are now.
The major problem with Obama and his advisiors is they are ACADEMICS who have lived the life of privilege out of touch with the real world --- Better educated and smarter than Bush's gang --- they are still likely to do just as badly at running the government --- for the same reason: OUT OF TOUCH WITH REALITY ... i.e. insane....people doing insane things.
4. Are we likely to get GOOD CHANGES in: appointing competent qualified people to run the government; instead of cronyism, or good changes that get rid of fraud, payoffs, and corruption in government?
Answer: No.
Because: Obama's friend Rezko was part and parcel of the mafia connected, corrupt, Daley Chicago political machine. Rezko was Obama's chief fundraiser from the beginning of his career in Illinois politics to his election to the U.S. Senate. There is very little coverage of the Obama Rezko/Daley corruption connections on National TV, but the local Chicago papers have a lot of info going back several years ... & it don't look good for Obama. He got IN with the Daley machine when his wife worked as an assistant to one of Daley's higher ups; Obama looks to be part and parcel of the same corrupt Daley political machine as his friend Rezko.
Some of the above is speculation based on facts.. What I KNOW Obama HAS ALREADY DONE makes all the above doubts and questions irrelevant in answering the question:
Is Obama qualified to be, or likely to be, a GOOD President?
Answer: NO. He has already done something so unconscionable, so dirty, so dangerous that no sane American would even consider voting for him. HE played the race card.
Those accusations of racism against the Clintons did not come from any public "Outcry" on the part of black people all over the country - those accusations of racism came solely and directly from the Obama Campaign. Obama was caught red-handed pushing those accusations to the press - in a 4-page Internal Campaign Memo - Listing those accusations & directing them to the press. The Huffington Post obtained a copy & published it on the web.
Shortly thereafter, during one of the debates, Tim Russert (MSNBC) ..... while rustling a copy of the 4-page Memo in his hand .... asked Obama .... your campaign has been pushing accusations of racism to the press (rustles pages) .... in a 4-page campaign memo .... what do you have to say about that?
Obama mumbled a few sentences ....( people in both campaigns get carried away and say things they shouldn't have said ... blah..blah) .... and .... then MSNBC/ the mainstream media .... NEVER MENTIONED IT AGAIN!.
Instead, MSNBC/NBC/CBS and all the rest of the mainstream CORPORATE-CONTROLLED media just went right on endlessly PUSHING the SAME totally ridiculous false accusations of "racism".
Obama made those accusations of racism .... in order to win the South Carolina primary. Obama has continued to make accusations of racism ... every time .... he falls behind in the polls. The question is: What USE of RACISM / inter-racial strife would he NOT stoop to IF elected President.
Which brings us to the Question: Is it likely Obama will TRANSCEND race... .Get Past the Politics of DIVISION;.. .....Unite this Country?
Given the DIVISION he has already created by making false accusations of racism - the answer is a resounding:
HELL NO!
Obama is the CORPORATE-CONTROLLED candidate being PUSHED by the CORPORATE-CONTROLLED Media.
Same Media that sold TOO MANY AMERICANS on Bush/Cheney. Same Media that SOLD U.S. a War.
Post a Comment
1. Are we likely to get GOOD CHANGES in Energy policy from an Obama administration?
Answer: NO. Why Not?
Because: Obama voted FOR the Cheney Energy Bill (H.R. 6) in 2005.
(which enabled the nuke industry to begin planning to build 29 new nukes (one of them in North Carolina.)
- after 30 years of no new nukes being built because the banks wouldn't loan the money - too risky.
The Cheney Energy Bill solved that problem for the nuke industry by guaranteeing taxpayer payback of any of the nuke loans that default ... (with the risk of default rated by the Congressional Budget Office at 50% or greater).
Because: Obama has been IN with the nuke industry for decades. Excelon Corp. of Illinois is the largest nuke operator on earth - ( they own the nuclear power plants in Illinois and they own Con-Ed in NY state). Excelon has been one of Obama's largest contributors since his earliest days in politics.
Because: Obama would not even be IN the race for president IF he was not HEAVILY SUPPORTED by the nuke industry. GE (2nd largest corporation on the planet) & Westinghouse are planning to build many of those nukes.
GE owns NBC & MSNBC. Westinghouse owns CBS. That's the reason "the Mainstreams Media" are PUSHING Obama for President/ slamming & smearing the Clintons. ABSENT BILLIONS of dollars worth of FREE Pro-Obama Advertising/Propaganda provided by NBC/MSNBC/and CBS Obama would not have gotten past the New Hampshire primary.
2. Are we likely to get GOOD CHANGES in the ECONOMY?
Answer: It doesn't look good. Obama's financial advisors include the followng people:
JEFFREY LIEBMAN: SOCIAL SECURITY: In a 2005 policy paper Liebman advocated a mix of benefit cuts, tax increases and mandatory personal accounts.
DAVID CUTLER: HEALTHCARE: He Says High Health Care Costs are Good.
AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: RICH GETTING RICHER, EVERYBODY ELSE GETTING POORER:
The stagnation of middle- and working-class incomes, and the anxiety this has generated, is, he says, a most pressing problem, but policymakers must be mindful about trying to address its root cause, which Goolsbee says is "radically increased returns to skill." ( i.e. College degrees are paying off more & more --- which is true, BUT Certainly DOES NOT account for the rise of the super rich, nor the increasing poverty of everyone else.)
(Evidently, Goolsbee's not old enough to remember the beginning of that Income Inequality, or to recognize THE CAUSE. It began in 1981. THE CAUSE of it was and is that Reagan cut the top tax rate DOWN from 70% to the low 30% s, AND Corporations all over America BEGAN instituting "THE TWO-TIER WAGE STRUCTURE'. i.e. Pay the people at the top a LOT MORE, Pay Everybody Else a LOT LESS. (If you searched old newspaper archives from the early 1980s you would find newspaper articles about the sudden appearance of the Two-Tier Wage Structure.)
3. Are we likely to get GOOD CHANGES in Foreign Policy?
Answer: Not Likely.
Among a dozen or so Foreign Policy Advisors the most "senior" advisor is:
Zbigniew Brzezinski. Former National Security Advisor to President Carter. Using the CIA & Billions of dollars, he ginned up a War in Afghanistan .... seeking as he said to "give the Soviet Union its own Vietnam.".
He Created the Taliban and Al Queda/ JIHAD/madrassa brainwashing schools for that purpose. Supported the dictator Pol Pol who massacred millions of Cambodian villagers. When asked, if in hindsight, considering that Al Queda eventually attacked America, and Pol Pot slaughtered millions - IF he would change anything he had done .... Zbig answered NO, he was satisfied with the results.
Electing Obama President is not likely to reassure the rest of the world that the U.S. is going to cease having an insane foreign policy; is likely to put Russia on an even more nervous hair trigger than they are now.
The major problem with Obama and his advisiors is they are ACADEMICS who have lived the life of privilege out of touch with the real world --- Better educated and smarter than Bush's gang --- they are still likely to do just as badly at running the government --- for the same reason: OUT OF TOUCH WITH REALITY ... i.e. insane....people doing insane things.
4. Are we likely to get GOOD CHANGES in: appointing competent qualified people to run the government; instead of cronyism, or good changes that get rid of fraud, payoffs, and corruption in government?
Answer: No.
Because: Obama's friend Rezko was part and parcel of the mafia connected, corrupt, Daley Chicago political machine. Rezko was Obama's chief fundraiser from the beginning of his career in Illinois politics to his election to the U.S. Senate. There is very little coverage of the Obama Rezko/Daley corruption connections on National TV, but the local Chicago papers have a lot of info going back several years ... & it don't look good for Obama. He got IN with the Daley machine when his wife worked as an assistant to one of Daley's higher ups; Obama looks to be part and parcel of the same corrupt Daley political machine as his friend Rezko.
Some of the above is speculation based on facts.. What I KNOW Obama HAS ALREADY DONE makes all the above doubts and questions irrelevant in answering the question:
Is Obama qualified to be, or likely to be, a GOOD President?
Answer: NO. He has already done something so unconscionable, so dirty, so dangerous that no sane American would even consider voting for him. HE played the race card.
Those accusations of racism against the Clintons did not come from any public "Outcry" on the part of black people all over the country - those accusations of racism came solely and directly from the Obama Campaign. Obama was caught red-handed pushing those accusations to the press - in a 4-page Internal Campaign Memo - Listing those accusations & directing them to the press. The Huffington Post obtained a copy & published it on the web.
Shortly thereafter, during one of the debates, Tim Russert (MSNBC) ..... while rustling a copy of the 4-page Memo in his hand .... asked Obama .... your campaign has been pushing accusations of racism to the press (rustles pages) .... in a 4-page campaign memo .... what do you have to say about that?
Obama mumbled a few sentences ....( people in both campaigns get carried away and say things they shouldn't have said ... blah..blah) .... and .... then MSNBC/ the mainstream media .... NEVER MENTIONED IT AGAIN!.
Instead, MSNBC/NBC/CBS and all the rest of the mainstream CORPORATE-CONTROLLED media just went right on endlessly PUSHING the SAME totally ridiculous false accusations of "racism".
Obama made those accusations of racism .... in order to win the South Carolina primary. Obama has continued to make accusations of racism ... every time .... he falls behind in the polls. The question is: What USE of RACISM / inter-racial strife would he NOT stoop to IF elected President.
Which brings us to the Question: Is it likely Obama will TRANSCEND race... .Get Past the Politics of DIVISION;.. .....Unite this Country?
Given the DIVISION he has already created by making false accusations of racism - the answer is a resounding:
HELL NO!
Obama is the CORPORATE-CONTROLLED candidate being PUSHED by the CORPORATE-CONTROLLED Media.
Same Media that sold TOO MANY AMERICANS on Bush/Cheney. Same Media that SOLD U.S. a War.
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]