Please Judge November 28, 2007
Posted by rosolio in Politics, Racism, Terrorism, World.Tags: gibbons, islam, khartoum, muhammad, sudan, teddy bear
add a comment
In the words of the great Adam Carolla, “Every culture is beautiful and we cannot judge.”
I can hear the nasally sarcasm from the Prophet of North Hollywood already, and hope that this story makes its way across his desk at KLSX just so I can hear him explode with a rage similar to my own about this story. When you’re mad, you want other people to be mad, I think because angry people by themselves are assholes, but when there are many, angry people are just right.
The finest news source in the world, the BBC, released this morning the story of Gillian Gibbons. She’s a 54 year old teacher from Liverpool who heads a class in the Sudanese capital of Khartoum. She’s obviously not there for the cheesesteaks or the skiing; this is clearly a humanitarian effort. You look at a picture of this woman and know that she’d be really good at reading to kids. And then you see she’s going to jail.
And then you see why.
Naming teddy bears in the class, one of her students wanted to name a bear after himself. His name is Muhammad. Because Gibbons allowed it, she’s being charged with insulting religion, inciting hated, and showing contempt for religious beliefs. Here’s the rationale:
“… chapter 42, verse 11 of the Koran does say: “[Allah is] the originator of the heavens and the earth… [there is] nothing like a likeness of Him.”
This is taken by Muslims to mean that Allah cannot be captured in an image by human hand, such is his beauty and grandeur. To attempt such a thing is seen as an insult to Allah.” [from the BBC]
What I’m about to say is not an indictment of every Muslim on the planet, or every religious person on the planet, because I do know that not everyone who believes in something is crazy.
But I do know that the people who believe Gibbons is a criminal are. They’re completely insane. They’re cavemen. You know how I know? Because of the punishments for the crime: Six months in jail (think less Prison Break and more Ben Hur), a fine, or 40 lashes. They’re going to whip this woman like she gave Ramses the stink eye. Retro.
Situations like this separate the civilized people from the cavemen. Who seems less crazy:
“This is a disgraceful decision and defies common sense. There was clearly no intention on the part of the teacher to deliberately insult the Islamic faith,” said Secretary-General Dr Muhammad Abdul Bari, in a strongly-worded statement.
“We call upon the Sudanese President, Omar al-Bashir, to intervene in this case without delay to ensure that Ms Gibbons is freed from this quite shameful ordeal.”
Or…
“What has happened was not haphazard or carried out of ignorance, but rather a calculated action and another ring in the circles of plotting against Islam,” the Sudanese Assembly of the Ulemas said a statement. [both quotes from the BBC]
Calculated action?!? This woman moved to your third world country to help the next generation possibly shake that moniker, but is really coming in as an act of holy war? Don’t you get the impression that somewhere in the Sudanese assembly, or maybe it’s just the Fundamentalist Islam manual (copyright Penguin 632 c.e.), that you have a conversion chart, where thousands of actions in the left column each correspond with one line on the left: “Conspiring against Islam”? This sort of psychotic religious paranoia is reminiscent of another crazy guy with loyal followers and facial hair (though admittedly, a lot less).
If a court in Alabama did something like this, we’d revoke their statehood and ban the Crimson Tide from the BCS. But because the people signing up a humanitarian to get beaten for giving a teddy bear (not a pile of shit, but a cuddly, wuddly teddy bear) the most common name in that part of the world are a different color than us, we have to tread lightly, because then we might be called racists or jingoists. Isn’t it more racist to have a different set of moral rules for people, like we don’t hold them to the same standards as us? Isn’t part of getting past petty differences to treat people the same, and holding white, black, brown, and yellow (like the Simpsons) people accountable when they’re being crazy?
We like to call ourselves the beacon of morality in the world. We lose that if we don’t judge.
Ace man, back me up.
Wilbon on Imus April 12, 2007
Posted by rosolio in Language, Racism.add a comment
Here’s an article by the great Mike Wilbon on the whole Don Imus thing. It’s a good one:
____________________________________________
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/10/AR2007041001891.html
Out of Imus’s Bigotry, a Zero Tolerance for Hate
By Michael Wilbon
Wednesday, April 11, 2007; Page E01
If calling the Rutgers women’s basketball players “nappy-headed hos” was the first deplorable and offensive utterance out of shock jock Don Imus’s mouth, there probably wouldn’t be a national firestorm over his reprehensible characterization. If this was some rare event, then there wouldn’t be organizations lining up to demand he be fired. If this was the first time, or second, or 10th, probably Imus wouldn’t have been suspended for two weeks from his syndicated radio show, which is simulcast on MSNBC.
But there’s nothing rare about Imus’s vile attacks. This is what he does as a matter of course. Imus and his studio cohorts have painted black people as convicts and muggers and worst of all, apes. Not only do they find it funny, they expect everybody else will as well.
Sid Rosenberg, whom Imus once fired, then rehired, said one morning in 2001 that Serena and Venus Williams would be better off posing in National Geographic than Playboy. He knew he was saying Serena and Venus are closer to wild animals than women.
Please don’t tell me it’s not fair to hold Imus accountable for that remark and others like it because it didn’t come out of his mouth. Imus hires the people who utter this filth and, in fact, wants them to go as far as possible because he believes it insulates him to a certain degree from the harshest criticism.
This is what Imus has done for years and years, and Viacom and NBC Universal pay him a king’s ransom to do it. Imus has been questioned about his tactics over the years, and he says repeatedly and dismissively, “Get over it.” He certainly isn’t the only morning shock jock doing this, but he’s the one whose behind is being scorched now and justifiably so.
Imus is the one who said in 1995 of Gwen Ifill, an accomplished, award-winning black journalist of incredible dignity and grace: “Isn’t the [New York] Times wonderful. . . . It lets the cleaning lady cover the White House.”
It’s Imus who called William C. Rhoden, the veteran Times sports columnist, “a quota hire.” Of course, the work, accomplishments or stature of their targets do not matter to Imus and his stooges. He makes fun of former attorney general Janet Reno’s Parkinson’s disease.
So “nappy-headed hos” wasn’t some weak moment of great exception on the Imus show. In 1997, during a “60 Minutes” profile, Mike Wallace confronted Imus and a former producer who quoted Imus as saying he’d hired a staffer to “do nigger jokes.” When I mentioned that earlier this week on ESPN’s Pardon the Interruption, Imus responded on his show that it simply did not happen — though I see it in a 2000 issue of the Columbia Journalism Review and had a producer access it through a transcript (also the audio version) on National Public Radio.
Wallace: “You’ve told Tom Anderson, the producer, in your car coming home that Bernard McGuirk is there to do nigger jokes.’”
Imus: “Well, I’ve . . . I never use that word.”
Wallace: “Tom?”
Tom Anderson: “I’m right here.”
Imus: “Did I use that word?
Anderson: “I recall you using that word.”
Imus: “Oh, okay, well then I used that word, but I mean . . . of course that was an off-the-record conversation . . .”
Wallace: “The hell it was.”
So, you’ll excuse me if I dismiss Imus’s apology as bogus. He’s apologized in the past, told veteran black journalist Clarence Page on the air he would “promise to cease all simian references to black . . . black athletes.” That was before Imus went back to the ape references, probably within a week.
Understandably, this has led to a whole lot of folks calling for Imus’s head. Personally, I’d rather see Imus have to confront anger, scorn and ridicule every single day. I’d rather see him have to deal with the accusation of being a bigot. I’d rather the criticism come at Imus from every angle, indefinitely, rather than have him slink away to private life.
You’ll have to excuse me for not believing a man can utter this brand of filth month after month, then proclaim testily he’s not a bigot. Firing, in some ways, would let him off the hook too easily. I’ll defend Imus’s right to free speech, while pointing out that those of us who find him and his goons contemptible have the exact same right to free speech. I’d rather see Imus squirm in the face of withering criticism than be fired and turn up six months later as some kind of martyr.
I’d rather see him snubbed by Cal Ripken, who refused to go on the air with Imus after his remarks about the Rutgers women. Ripken was supposed to appear on the Imus show yesterday to promote his new book.
Already a little squeamish about appearing on the show, Ripken’s decision to tell Imus no became an easy one after the latest spewing. “It was set up by the publisher, but I said no because I don’t want anybody to perceive that I condone those comments because I don’t,” Ripken said in a telephone conversation yesterday. “And if you go on that show, that’s exactly what the perception would be.”
Ripken said he does not want to be seen as someone wielding a moral compass. But I wonder now how many of these prominent journalists and politicians who use the platform Imus provides (and therefore give him cover) will have as much conviction as Ripken displayed.
Imus, not surprisingly, is trying to frame the discussion in a way that paints him as a good guy who did a stupid thing, which might be okay if he wasn’t such a serial offender. Yes, Imus routinely has riveting political discussions, as recently as last fall when he engaged Harold Ford, then running for the U.S. Senate, in conversations about running for office as a young black man in the South, in this case Tennessee. When Imus says he’s not unfamiliar with black people, he’s telling the truth. He’s not some idiot segregationist who seals himself off from black people, which is what makes these episodes even more disgusting.
If you believe the bosses at Viacom and NBC Universal have any guts, and I’m not sure I do, then you might believe the suspension represents a warning of zero tolerance from here on in and that Imus is one more incident from being dumped. And while I’m not agitating for Imus to be fired, I’d certainly raise a toast if it happens. Until then, what Imus has prompted is a necessary national conversation. The meeting with the Rutgers women is necessary — so is the vigil to stand over him and remind him that even if he doesn’t get it, many of us do.
Common Sense Man: Viewer Discretion Advised January 19, 2007
Posted by rosolio in Common Sense, Immigration, Racism, TV.add a comment
Viewer Discretion Advised
Haven’t gotten anything out there in a while, but then again nothing has gotten me wound up enough to rant about. I have no idea if that sentence is grammatically correct, but I’m not going back to edit it. I don’t want to. There it is.
Muslim groups and Islamic-American watchdog organizations are all bent out of shape about this season of 24, saying they are concerned that it is painting a bad picture of arabs. In an actual quote, a spokesman said: “After watching that show, I was afraid to go to the grocery store because I wasn’t sure the person next to me would be able to differentiate between fiction and reality.” This person is a preening blowhard. Can’t differentiate between TV and reality? Angry that it’s painting a bad picture? The people who are going to be influenced by things they see on TV aren’t going to be by a fictional show that says Viewer Discretion Advised at the beginning. If anything, I don’t know, they might be influenced by the sectarian violence and anti-americanism going on in the middle east. While I’m not in favor of singling out ethnic groups and making sweeping judgements, it is a statement of fact that every IED in Iraq was designed and placed by a muslim gentleman with the intentions of killing an american soldier. So if I’m going to be a small minded thug and say that all muslims are out to kill me, I’m going to get my information from the news…reality…, not 24. It is equally small minded and stupid to be unable to differentiate between the lunatics (yes, lunatics) in the middle east who danced in the streets on 9/11 and the american citizens who happen to be from one of these countries. While it is a statement of fact that sleeper cells may exist, 99.99999999% of the muslims in this country are good people. It’s like any other religion, you’ve got your fundamentalist, every-word-literally nutjobs everywhere. 24 is not saying that all muslims are terrorists, but all jihadists are arabs. Just like every militant doctor-shooting pro-lifer is a Christian.
This wouldn’t make me so mad if 24 wasn’t GOING OUT OF THEIR WAY TO PROVE THE POINT THAT ARABS ARE GETTING A BAD RAP FOR THIS! For Christssake, you letter-writing xenophobes, there’s a whole storyline following the mistreatment of a member of an Islamic-American Anti-Defimation group! It’s making your goddamn point for you! They’re just angry that a show is doing more to dictate what jingoism can actually do than these watchdog group’s pamphlets. Watch the show before you whip out your pen and get all pissed. Plus, if you recall, the last time there was a muslim-related terrorist attack (season 2), there was an evil white capitalist who was really to blame in the background!
24’s not racist; these letter-writers are. Morons. Same idiots who wrote angry letters about Borat being anti-semetic. Nothing to do with religion, race or whatever. Everything to do with assholes who want to get their picture in front of the camera. Imbeciles who shout at the top of their lungs about “Not wanting our children to see a difference between people” while at the same time demanding kids become indoctrinated in traditions that make them “proud to be different.” Don’t look at us differently, but we’re going to be different. Cake and eating it. Don’t hold a PTA meeting because a kindergartener asks a jewish classmate why he’s wearing a yarmulke. EXPLAIN IT, DON’T PANIC!
Don’t get upset about things you don’t understand, don’t assume that fiction (which happens to mirror reality) is going to paint a bad picture of you, and don’t keep shoveling coal into this engine of racism. That’s all these watchdog groups do; make people sit down and study the cosmetic differences between people. Oh no, we didn’t have an Asian person in our miller lite commercial. Are we saying that Asian people don’t like miller lite? Quick, photoshop one in there. Bam, a person becomes a ‘one’.
These are the same idiots who go to Kenya and go “Wow, look at all the minorities.” It’s the same people who don’t want anyone to say Christmas tree, but instead Holiday tree. The tree is linked to Christmas! It’s a Christian holiday! I’m not a Christian, but I call it a goddamn Christmas tree because that’s what it is! What, are you fooling people when you say Holiday tree? Is there someone out there who’s going, “So, when the oil for the lanterns in the desert lasted an unexpected 8 days and 8 nights, there was a temperate PINE TREE IN THE CORNER OF THE ROOM?!?” The people who are so terrified of saying something offensive or racist are incredibly racist and offensive because they’re recognizing lines that can’t cross, which does little more than highlight the lines themselves. Stop seeing the lines and all of this goes away.
I HATE stupid people. Or maybe I just think I do because of the ones I’ve seen on TV.
Kramer vs. Kramer December 1, 2006
Posted by rosolio in Common Sense, Racism.add a comment
A topic that has been very much on my mind was recently tackled by the great Aceman as part of his full salvo of common sense attack on the psychotic, money grubbing lich that is Gloria Allred. The trial system in this country is obsolete. It was designed to create as fair and unbiased a trial as possible by selecting jurors who didn’t know the plaintiff, the defendant, or anything about the trial. The thing is, the only people they would select were rich, white, landowning men, who were also the only educated people back then. This isn’t to say that we go back to a racist/sexist/moneyist (what the hell?) juror selection system. But the problem is that with information being so readily available (I can watch TV on my cellphone using a brilliant device called a Slingbox), the only people left who don’t know about these high profile cases are going to be uneducated shut-ins; that’s just a fact. In my hour and a half stint on ESPN1300 last week, I received a dozen questions about my opinion regarding the Michael Richards situation (since, as a standup, I get to deal with hecklers and hecklerquette all the time). This was a sports show for christssake, and they were talking about this case (I use that term, because Allred is trying to make it into one). So if this thing does go to trial, who the hell would they find for the jury? Who doesn’t know about it? Uneducated people who can be easily manipulated by Allred and her ravings. All she has to do is drop the racism card and everyone on the jury will be terrified of letting a “convicted racist” get off “scott free” (I put that in quotes, because Richards’ isn’t exactly getting out of this with his career or life in tact).
I agree wholeheartedly with the Aceman on this one: hurt feelings should never incur financial damages because there’s no hospital bill or wages lost. The “victims” in the comedy club did not feel threatened by a skinny senior citizen onstage with a microphone. And if this thing does go to trial, Michael Richards will pay Gloria Allred, a rich, white, landowning vulture of a woman, a couple million dollars. Is that how our system is really supposed to work? If Michael Richards wasn’t Kramer but instead worked at a Jiffy Lube, would Allred be demanding justice in the form of a wire transfer?
How do you fix it? Two choices: either a lie detector, the technology of which has become so advanced that it’s 99.99999999999999% accurate (which is more than you can say for jurors [re: human error] or birth control medication), or a bench trial. The former was the Aceman’s solution, and I see no problem with mine: a single, impartial, heavily educated and heavily experienced arbitrator who employs common sense and analysis to find the truth. No more games, no more manipulation, no more ignorance, no more Gloria goddamn Allred. Here’s hoping a house falls on her.
Candidacy in Question October 23, 2006
Posted by rosolio in Obama, Politics, Racism.add a comment
The title character in Warren Beatty’s ‘Bulworth’ kicked off his campaign speeches with the easily digestible line: “We stand on the doorstep of a new millenium.” A lot of people saw the turn of the century that way, expecting everything to change. It is arguable that the terrorist attacks on September 11 did in fact change the world, but it didn’t really change America at all. If you want to argue it quantitative or qualitatively, the day-to-day in this country is exactly the same as it was in 1999. Sure, you can’t bring shampoo on a plane anymore (which is ridiculous), but once you reach your destination, the world is pretty much the same. The government has always been using illegal wiretaps and has always been viewed as corrupt or directionless. That’s just part of the deal. It doesn’t help exactly that the last two presidents have been textbook embodiments of everything their parties stand for: Clinton being the affirmative action, welfare state saxaphone playing smooth as cream cheese operator and George W. Bush being the money grubbing, one nation under god, anti-abortion good ole boy. These are of course exaggerations in terms, but not really in action. It is the stark polarity of these two men that have launched what acclaimed historian Howard Smead labled “a dangerously sectarian culture war.” We have red states, we have blue states, and each side thinks the other is stupid. Democracy in action.
The funny thing about the people who carry the placards and wear the buttons and write the letters and shout the slogans is that Clinton and Bush are incredibly similar. Both are old, rich white guys from Yale. Both subscribed to the country club law of taking care of their backers and special interest groups. They are the face of a nation that went from being the most socially progressive to the most culturally stilted. When you look at the politics of nations like England, Germany, China, and India, it almost looks like they’re in the future, like they have flying cars or something.
But on November 7th, we’ll know if we are indeed standing on the doorstep of change. On November 7th, Barack Obama will decide whether he’s going to make a run at the presidency in 2008.
The first effect of this is that the democrats won’t be forced to roll out Hillary Clinton to challenge the republicans, who will likely pass on too-secular John McCain and too-inexperienced Rudi Giuliani to wheel out another faceless republican clone like Bill Frist or George “Let’s Mock Some Indians” Allen. I honestly have not seen enough of Hillary to make an assessment of her capablities as a leader, and I refuse to jump on the bandwagon that claims it’ll just be a third term for Bill. The part that troubles me about Mrs. Rodham is that she’s a carpetbagger, having moved to New York to claim the Senate. I think she wants to be President, but doesn’t want any of the control or responsibility.
The second effect is that Barack Obama is a downright impressive guy. His speeches are empassioned and nonmechanical. He doesn’t come across as a politician, he comes across as a leader. And while the die-hards will say that we don’t care what the world thinks, the world will like us a lot more with someone like him in office.
Now, it’s not all peaches and cream on the way to the white house, especially for a black politican (he’s actually only half black, but the ignorant among us fail to see the other half; these are the people who came up with the term ‘octaroon’). Forget the fact that he doesn’t have an anglican name (and you KNOW someone will try to make a connection between Obama and Osama…just wait on that). The man is the wrong color for a lot of people in this country, far more than we would care to believe. And in all likelihood, somewhere on the campaign trail or during his term, some racist Sum’bitch is going to try to shoot him. Colin Powell’s wife talked him out of a presidential bid for this exact reason. As progressive as we like to think we are, the confederate flag is still a major part of the Southern culture, and the “they’re takin’ over!” mentality will only be goaded further by a black candidate or president.
Personally, I think there is a visibly important component to Obama as a president and it’s not his skin color. It’s his age. America has only been around for 230 years, yet we have this image of being archaic already. A little revolution every now and then is a good thing, and I’ll betcha Obama can provide it. Here’s hoping he goes for it.
The Truth about Duke March 29, 2006
Posted by rosolio in Basketball, Common Sense, Racism.add a comment
Now, my well-documented opinion regarding Duke University could easily be boiled down to my distain for their basketball team if one so desired. It is very easy to take everything I say and toss it under the umbrella of, “Oh, it’s a Maryland fan looking for additional, albeit unnecessary, reasons to hate his ACC rival.” That’s totally fine and, to be honest, it does factor in a tiny bit (it has to). But the fact of the matter is that my distaste ventures far beyond the basketball court and what Dookies across the nation would refer to as “petty jealousy.”
For one thing, I know these people a lot better than most outside of Durham, having grown up in the Baltimore private school scene. A collection of a number of small schools linked together by neighbors and sports created one giant graduating class, in a way. Like the students at Duke, our families were paying an exhorbant cost for our education. Like the students at Duke, we lived in a sort of isolated bubble, separated from the violent reality of our hometown. Smack dab on the Mason Dixon line, this collective was a perfect blend of New England prep school and Old South parochialism (don’t get me wrong, I really enjoyed my school and definitely have rose-colored glasses that tell me we were by far the most socially active and community serving member of this group. Maybe I’m biased, but it seems to be a general consensus). The fact of the matter is that very few people tried to understand the world outside the one of privilege, and those who did could hardly relate to it. The only reason my school could seem as being more aware revolves around a recent tragedy that very few other area private schools have experienced, but plagues the surrounding community on a daily basis.
My experience in this tightly-knit group paints a very specific picture of the kind of entitlement and invincibility that can hang over an institution like Duke. Dick Vitale and every Dookie on the planet will wax poetic about an elite institution full of some of the brightest young minds in the country, but they won’t bring up the $43,000 price tag that comes with it. That’s $6k a year more than Harvard and $4k more than Yale. There are students there on a financial aid, need-based and scholarship, but they are exceptions and not the rule.
The entitlement comes from a total lack of accountability for the full run of their lives. They get caught drinking and don’t pay the citation. They get DUIs and don’t spend the requisite night in the clink. They treat other people like they are less important not out of some kind of psychological fear or insecurity, but because they genuinely believe it. Why shouldn’t they? Their parents have kept them dodging bullets their whole lives, the same bullets they dodged when they were younger. It’s easy in a small community like Baltimore, or Durham, where all of the powerful people, and their kids, know each other. It sounds to be a regurgitation of a stereotype, but I’ve seen enough first-hand to know that it is backed up by legions of facts.
Now to the events of this week: I am doing my absolute best to keep “innocent until proven guilty” in my mind when it comes to the rape allegations. And I’m also doing my best to, if the charges turn out to be founded, blame the people and not the school. However, the dirty little secret is out of the bag and the hounds are getting released (hey hey, cliche).
The Raleigh News-Observer reported that 15 of the suspects (one-third) have been previously cited for alcohol and disturbing the peace. Sure, not a big deal, it happens to everyone. But these people weren’t punished: “The paper said that most of those charges were resolved in deals with prosecutors that allowed the players to escape criminal convictions.” So since there were no convictions, the University could leave its money-generating lacrosse team on the field. And they have total deniability. Throw in the fact that the attorney for the current suspects is a Duke Law alum from 2001 and the picture gets clearer and clearer: obviously, Luca Brasi wasn’t available. As bad as this would be for the players, who could do 25 to life (which is even longer for an upper-class suburban kid), it would be worse for the University, right in the bottom line, where it hurts them the most. We know why the students were bailed out of their charges; because a game in the L column costs the university money; an appearence in the NCAA lacrosse national championship is worth in excess of $1 million. Why let that slip away if you don’t have to? Needless to say, Duke officials are not investigating this case.
Duke is an environment where kids who have been given a free pass their entire lives can be guaranteed an extention of their invincibility, though numerous contacts and a diploma carrying a reputation inflated by years of careful manipulation and exploitation (whew, strong words). They charge an insane tuition that is essentially a buy-in fee to an alumni network designed to indefinitely line the pockets of university officials with no questions asked. If the truly gifted, intelligent students in Durham (I am aware that there are students who have earned their way in) want that immaculate reputation to hold its ground, they need to hold their community accountable for the culture of greed that it preaches.
Ann Coulter: Lunatic March 28, 2006
Posted by rosolio in Common Sense, Media, Politics, Racism.add a comment
There is an old trope of writing that I’ve always chosen to ignore, and that’s beginning an essay with a thesis statement. This time is going to be different, however, because I believe Ann Coulter to be completely insane.
I don’t really need all that much evidence here; there isn’t an intelligent person on the planet who could possibly disagree. They may agree with her politics, that’s perfectly fine, but even the most extreme right-wing-prayer-in-schools-anti-gay-marriage-pro-racial-profiling Republicans know that she’s out of her mind. But she’s their lunatic, so it’s okay. It’s exactly the same way that Democrats view Michael Moore and his self-righteous struggle against the Bush family. Moore and Coulter are equal on the level of hyperbole and showmanship, although Moore’s doctrine is incendiary where Coulter’s is hateful. The woman was quoted as wishing Timothy McVeigh blew up the New York Times building, and in the next sentence calls people who are against the war in Iraq traitorous anti-patriots. She’s not the guy from Memento, okay, she’s just a walking contradiction: a New England born New Yorker who hates the blue states like they’re the Red Menace.
There are people who agree with Ann Coulter’s statements; her legion of acolytes who think Rush Limbaugh is too moderate (quick sidenote: while an unquestionably dangerous spewer of disinformation, Limbaugh is less dangerous than Coulter for the sole reason that he is a caricature. He comes out and says that global warming is impossible, using theology as evidence. His credibility is so out there after getting torn to shreds by Al Franken that he’s really nothing more than a guy on the side of the road with a “The Apocalypse Is Coming!” sign and a tiny tip jar). Coulter’s posse is made up of two kinds of people: people who like her because she’s loud and brash and angers democrats. If you hate your neighbor, you’re going to smile whenever the pit bull from across the street takes a shit on his lawn. You know it’s a bad thing, but you love seeing the neighbor have to get out the shovel and clean it up. The other kind of person who loves this vile harpy uses the word/phrase “Sum’bitch.” They own a great deal of Larry the Cable Guy memorabilia, including a “Git-R-Done” shotglass. They see an honor in being simple and view intelligent people, no matter how modest, as arrogant. They often utter the sentence: “I don’t have a problem with them, they have a problem with me.” They’ve all used Rush Limbaugh as a gateway drug, thinking they are graduating from radio evangelism to Big Boy Politics, even though their Athena of serrated jingoism is just as criminally misinformed as the fat man of the AM dial.
Coulter hides under her rain-delay-tarp of free speech (which she only sees as constitutional law when it applies to her), saying the millions of people who loudly call her out on her shit are anti-American because they are attempting to squelch her right to free speech. I am not saying she should not be permitted to belt out her message of militant partisanship. One day, like Joe McCarthy, William Jennings Bryan, and David Duke, Coulter’s voice will get a little quieter as the rest of the world starts to tune her out. That’s the end of the road for a zealot. The sooner people stop listening, the sooner she’ll shut the hell up.
Rotten in Denmark? February 4, 2006
Posted by rosolio in Common Sense, Media, Politics, Racism, Terrorism, World.add a comment
Unless you’ve been living under a rock, or just don’t have any interest in international news you’re going to have heard about this (if your idea of international events revolves entirely around Simon Cowell, you’d better hurry and go vote for this week’s “Who Wants to Marry My Cat” on Fox). To make a long story short, a Danish newspaper decided it would be prudent/hilarious/incendiary to publish a week-long series of illustrations depicting the prophet Muhammad as a psychotic terrorist with a bomb-shaped turban (By the way, according to the Qu’ran, you can’t depict the image of Muhammad at all in any fashion, good or bad. So the fact that he’s drawn like a terrorist is irrelevant in many eyes). Before we get into the actual topic here, let’s get this out of the way: can a Western nation, powerful or otherwise, repeatedly make sweeping judgments and openly mock a gigantic organization of people who are currently embroiled in a culture war with the predominately Christian and Jewish West?
You can’t do that.
(The Can You Do That? feature will be launching shortly. Consider this an appetizer, a little piece of toast with cream cheese and smoked salmon. Main course to follow.)
Anyway, so the Danes made a mistake, I think that’s clear. A lot of people are trying to play the Freedom of the Press card, forgetting of course that the Bill of Rights does not cover the entire world and that America’s laws do not apply in every corner of the globe. It’s alarming, but true, there are other nations with other governments. Even the people who argue that our policies are always correct and that the citizens of foreign nations would have better lives if they adopted our ways can’t disagree with this one. When you satirize someone who looks differently and acts differently than your majority does, you’re just begging for someone to get offended. If Al-Jazzera, the Fair and Balanced Fox News of the Middle East, responded to the outbreak of sexual assault by priests with images of Jesus (H. Christ) engaged in deviant activity with small boys, you’d see Rumsfeld and Cheney tossing the phrase “act of war” around. So something’s rotten in the state of Denmark, they showed staggeringly poor judgment (this wouldn’t be the first time; historians have found Danish illustrations of Fortinbras wearing a baby bonnet and holding a rattle). Because the ratio of psychotic fundamentalist muslims to laid back muslims is about the same as rainy days in Tucson, yeah, the Danes were out of line.
That being said…look at the result.
The Danish embassy in Jakarta was stormed (a word forever associated with the Bastille) by angry protesters. The protesters did not reach the embassy itself, but it wasn’t for a lack of trying. Danish flags and effigies of the Prime Minister of Denmark were burned in the streets around the world. Gunmen raid the EU office in Gaza demanding an apology. Death threats were mailed to the newspaper and Denmark’s government officials.
This is not exactly a rational response. While a lot of people do not want to say it, one of the reasons so many apologies are being issued is that no one in Denmark wants to get blown up. And you know what? Everyone in the world right now, no matter how free thinking and accepting of all peoples, thinks it’s about to happen.
You do not protest a blasphemous cartoon by acting them out. You do not challenge people who make sweeping judgments by making your own. It wasn’t like the Government of Denmark released an image of Muhammad doing something ridiculous and declared it their new national seal. The country is being blamed for something that happened in a newspaper. That’s like a family in Brooklyn being called insensitive over a controversial cartoon in the New Yorker. That doesn’t exactly follow.
Attention Middle Eastern and Islamic nations: if you want people to stop depicting your religion as one based in violence and lunacy, stop reacting to controversy with violence and lunacy. There are civilized ways to do this, the world was already on your side in this matter. Those M-16 bullets don’t have to burn a hole in your pocket, you’ll have another chance to fire them into the air. Chill out.
A great example to follow is the one taken by Ali al-Sistani, the Grand Ayatollah of Iraq who, in the same speech, condemned the drawings while making no call for protests, suggesting that militant Muslims were partly to blame for distorting Islam’s image (MSNBC, 2/3). The true leadership of Islam understands what’s going on and knows that they are responsible for policing the out-of-control members of their following. The Vatican is equally responsible for keeping a leash on their fundamentalist Christian groups. The Philadelphia Eagles as an organization are responsible for keeping their fans from throwing batteries at opposing players and fans (there’s actually an NFL mandate penalizing a home team 15 yards if the fans throw things on the field; they hold the team responsible). Every group has its share of crazies and it is up to the leadership to keep them under control, lest their whole group gets lumped under the same umbrella.
-Mike Rosolio
