Letters to the Editor
rkr327
Published Letters: 43 Editor's Choice: 5
-
In three posts (3)
[Read the article: Firing Imus was the right thing]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Imus III
When I heard the decision had been made to drop Imus by MSNBC last night, and by CBS this evening, I was depressed in a way I hadn’t experienced since we were driven to the Iraq War in the first quarter of 2003. [Note: there is NO comparison in magnitude.] At one level my discomfort was a purely personal reaction to what I experienced as a profound disjuncture between what I believed to be sane and reasonable and what happened. But there is a resonance with Iraq. With the Imus affair, as with Iraq, bad information, ideological intoxications, and lack of serious consideration drove matters to where I was certain they should not go. And again, main stream media failed to do its job: gather the facts and place them in appropriate context. Again the media allowed itself to be stampeded by the emotions of the moment. Exploiting a glittering toy of a story was given precedence over establishing truth.
Not the greatest generation, but the Rush Limbaugh generation.
-
Imus yet again
[Read the article: Who gets to use the N word?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The basic ‘shtick’ with Imus is the unedited id loose in the real world. [Say anything!] Although he does edit himself, he is hardly perfect in that regard, and things over the line will out.
It’s humor! Sophomoric, crude and often very funny. Anyone who takes Imus and company seriously in such business is seriously courting loosing their grip. Exploiting stereotypes is part of the game. But Imus and his gang play it entirely in the spirit of ‘equal opportunity’.
It is one thing to cycle through a select group of stereotypes, however humorously, in pursuit of an agenda (racial, political, personal, whatever); it is quite another to present a whirling carnival burlesque of stereotypes, with no discernable agenda at all. The sheer idiocy of the stereotypes themselves is thrown into high relief. Jokes are what they are good for – the only thing they are good for. THAT is the humor heard day in and day out on ‘Imus in the Morning’. It has been on the air, accepted and appreciated, by a wide audience for over thirty years. If it is all so egregiously offensive, how could that have happened? I suggest it is because most were seeing it as I have proposed: sophomoric, rude, crude, stereotype exploiting, and - often enough – very funny. Face it, this is a well-neigh universal ‘guilty pleasure’ of the human race. One imagines the people of Cave A yukked it up over the ‘shortcomings’ of the people in Cave B, and vice versa.
There is more to be said, and the above with MUCH else can be found on Joan Walsh's bolg on pages 28 and 29 ('In 3 Posts') following her 'Firing Imus was the Right Thing' posting from April 11, 2007.
-
Wisdom
[Read the article: Giuliani pulls a Cheney]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Nearly everything the administration did (and Rudy is following along) falls apart when confronted by a simple aphorism:
The wisdom to act is not wisdom in the actions chosen.
No one, now or ever, proposed we do nothing after 9/11. That by no means amounts to rubber stamping whatever wanders into our heads to do. With regard to Iraq: What made that war, at that time, in that way, THE way to proceed in the wake of 9/11, and against Islamic radicalism? By all means take the offensive, but only after careful consideration over just what is the WISE thing to do. If WWI and Vietnam teach us anything, it is that being stupid is just as dangerous as being weak and irresolute.
-
On Armed Aggression as the Dominant Mode of Response
[Read the article: A new low for Giuliani]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Nearly evertthing the administration has done falls apart when confronted with a simple aphorism:
The wisdom to act is not wisdom in the actions chosen
At no point, before or since choosing the Iraq War as our defining response to 9/11, has this administration or its acolytes been made to address the question: What made this war, at this time, in this way THE way to proceed in the wake of 9/11 and against Islamic radicalism?
The administration and its supporter reply to objections to their courses by insisting we need to be strong and resolute.
Perhaps the signal lesson to be gleaned from the dark history of the 20th century is that being foolish (WWI, Vietnam) can be every bit as deadly as being weak and irresolute(fascism, WWII) Careful consideration and sound judgment are essential. In a world that fights with Weapons of Mass destruction, war takes on the aspect of striking matches in a dynamite factory. You may get away with it for a while, but it ISN'T a good idea.