Like the good Reverend Jackson, Sharpton will be held to a different, more lax set of standards and expectations. No one would dare challenge him on procedural, ethical or financial matters because of the trouble that would invite.
What would, likely, be the first words out of Sharpton's mouth if he was dinged for not doing something he was required to (and that all the other candidates have to go through)?
Those are not honorable, "men of God". They are politicians and, worse, hucksters and bullcrap artists. Both of them. They don't represent, or speak for, ANY black people I know or work with.
They make fun of those two more than I do.
If I had a nickel for everytime I heard some sort of variation on the phrase "F*** Jesse!", I could retire.
Yeah, so what? Give me a break, Shawn. Several of the people cited (Steve Barrett, in particular) are columnists found on the op-ed pages. In this case, I know for a fact because he's in the Chattanooga Times-Free Press...my hometown paper! They're paid to write their opinions, pro OR anti any given subject or person. Barrett is not a reporter or writes in the section A or B "news" sections of the paper.
In any case, as usual I have to throw a squinty, doubtful eye at sources you cite or parade around as "truth", just because of past scenarios. You understand, don't you? Nothing personal, but you tend to trot out some questionable, "tell-it-like-I-see-it" sources from time to time. You'll forgive me if I don't put TOO much stock in the link above.
Jackson, Sharpton and West DO NOT get a "free ride", nor should they. But I've never seen CNN or other, highly visible symbols of the "mainstream" say anything bad about Jackson. The others? I don't know, but probably not too much either.
Bill O'Reilly is the ONLY person - of any sort of visibility or mainstream stature - I've seen dare to challenge or question Jackson on his finances and other dealings.
Link doesn't prove - or change - a thing to me. Or anyone else, I would imagine, who knows what's what. Just shows that there are people who, rightfully, question and put the oftentimes lunatic rantings of Jackson and Sharpton into proper perspective. Or - heaven forbid - poke fun and mock the two hucksters. Just as others do to Ross Perot, Pat Buchanan, etc.
Actually that's a good point: take whatever feelings you have toward Buchanan or someone like him (the "I wish he'd just shut up and go away" or "oh no, here he goes again...") and flip that around. THAT'S how many feel about Jackson. A divisive, flamethrowing pot-stirrer, full of equal parts crap and hot air.
Does that kinda put it into some context?
He's done next to nothing, but yet is often hailed as the end-all/be-all of black opinion and leadership.
He's anything but and, glad to say, most black people I know see right through his crap.
Objectivity is not the issue here. The belittlement of black leaders is the issue.
The conservative talk radio/ Fox News/ Drudge Report megaphone has made the belittlement of black leaders one its priorities.
Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson are the two most ridiculed black leaders on TV and radio.
There's a difference between journalistic objectivity and journalistic integrity.
No one should get a free ride, but when have the attacks on Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton ever been legitimate? Mostly, they're not.
Yeah, and just look at how Fox News/Drudge ridiculed Larry Elder and Alan Keyes. That was just terrible too.... oh wait you don't consider them black leaders do you?
Perhaps I missed Fox News' criticism-in-passing *nudge nudge, wink wink* of Alan Keyes, but do you honestly contend that Jackson and Sharpton are not the two most ridiculed black leaders?
...and mostly for no good reason.
"Did you hear Jesse Jackson diss our Founding Fathers the other day!"
What are you, Ritchie Cunningham now? May as well tell me to "sit on it".
Quote:
Objectivity is not the issue here. The belittlement of black leaders is the issue.
Yeah, and? I can't think of two "black leaders" who deserve it more. Sorry, that's coming from a longtime Alan Keyes supporter/admirer, so I admit my bias. Those two clowns couldn't carry Mr. Keyes' lunch.
Quote:
The conservative talk radio/ Fox News/ Drudge Report megaphone has made the belittlement of black leaders one its priorities.
I'd like to see that somewhere. Oh, wait...just stupid or corrupt black leaders. Well, you're half right. Hey, your odds are improving!
Quote:
Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson are the two most ridiculed black leaders on TV and radio.
Anyone know of a good reason that they SHOULDN'T be? Just curious...
Quote:
There's a difference between journalistic objectivity and journalistic integrity.
Hey, I agree 100%. While you're thinking about that, relay that to your buddies at the New York Times and CNN.
Quote:
No one should get a free ride, but when have the attacks on Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton ever been legitimate? Mostly, they're not.
Questioning Jackson's finances is off-limits and "bad form", then? Questioning or bringing to light his "shakedown" tactics he uses on certain companies and organizations to "play his way"? His pathological fixation with microphones and TV cameras? His inserting himself into situations where he's not been asked? His wrongheaded, don't-work-and-never-have views on any number of issues? His rush to ALWAYS get on the side of anyone he thinks is being "done wrong", even if that means showing up to support some thugs who started a brawl in a high-school football bleacher that injured others?
Yes, all completely illegitimate attacks and charges. Every one. He's a saint and a great man, and I'm just not seeing it.
And that's just Jesse. Shall I proceed with Mr. Sharpton?
Maybe I have just been arguing with the various "progressive" elements here in FSC...ummm.. I mean AppleOutsider for too long because I looked at Howard Dean's site and while I can understand why Democrats would like him, he doesn't seem all that "progressive/liberal" to me.
He advocates civil unions, and I don't think many Republicans would have a problem with that. I think religions types (myself included) have trouble with the word marriage. Call it a civil union and give it the exact same legal rights and I have no problem with it.
He seems pretty hard-line on no more gun control.
He is very pro-choice, but how can you not expect this for a Democratic presidential candidate.
His "universal health care" is basically expanding eligibility for state and federal programs.
I just don't see what would get people's panties in a bunch about him.
Maybe, maybe not. I don't know. I've seen tons that are. And I've seen some that aren't. But, not being a fan/admirer of the fella I can't say that those others bother me.
In so many circles he's so shielded and untouchable, that it's nice to see him treated without kid gloves. It is a rarity in the mainstream press. I see just as many white liberals lining up to touch his robe or kiss his boots as I do many blacks.
Chachi could have run for President had he not gotten into those drug problems. "Charles in Charge" is presidential stepping stone material if you ask me.
But if they are all democrats they are going to get lame questions. They should let a republican ask the questions so we can see how they each stand up in a real debate.
Comments
Originally posted by DanMacMan
If the Dems nominate either of these guys, it all but guarentees a victory for Bush in '04.
I agree that Sharpton stands no chance.
But Dean?
"Oh yeah I never heard of him so he stands no chance"
Like the good Reverend Jackson, Sharpton will be held to a different, more lax set of standards and expectations. No one would dare challenge him on procedural, ethical or financial matters because of the trouble that would invite.
What would, likely, be the first words out of Sharpton's mouth if he was dinged for not doing something he was required to (and that all the other candidates have to go through)?
Those are not honorable, "men of God". They are politicians and, worse, hucksters and bullcrap artists. Both of them. They don't represent, or speak for, ANY black people I know or work with.
They make fun of those two more than I do.
If I had a nickel for everytime I heard some sort of variation on the phrase "F*** Jesse!", I could retire.
Originally posted by DanMacMan
If the Dems nominate either of these guys, it all but guarentees a victory for Bush in '04.
You need to be more open-minded. Remember '92? Nobody expected Clinton to win that year. You have to have MORE FAITH. Go Al!!!!
Originally posted by ShawnPatrickJoyce
Disrespect, Distortion and Double Binds: Media treatment of progressive black leaders
Yeah, so what? Give me a break, Shawn. Several of the people cited (Steve Barrett, in particular) are columnists found on the op-ed pages. In this case, I know for a fact because he's in the Chattanooga Times-Free Press...my hometown paper! They're paid to write their opinions, pro OR anti any given subject or person. Barrett is not a reporter or writes in the section A or B "news" sections of the paper.
In any case, as usual I have to throw a squinty, doubtful eye at sources you cite or parade around as "truth", just because of past scenarios. You understand, don't you? Nothing personal, but you tend to trot out some questionable, "tell-it-like-I-see-it" sources from time to time. You'll forgive me if I don't put TOO much stock in the link above.
Jackson, Sharpton and West DO NOT get a "free ride", nor should they. But I've never seen CNN or other, highly visible symbols of the "mainstream" say anything bad about Jackson. The others? I don't know, but probably not too much either.
Bill O'Reilly is the ONLY person - of any sort of visibility or mainstream stature - I've seen dare to challenge or question Jackson on his finances and other dealings.
Link doesn't prove - or change - a thing to me. Or anyone else, I would imagine, who knows what's what. Just shows that there are people who, rightfully, question and put the oftentimes lunatic rantings of Jackson and Sharpton into proper perspective. Or - heaven forbid - poke fun and mock the two hucksters. Just as others do to Ross Perot, Pat Buchanan, etc.
Actually that's a good point: take whatever feelings you have toward Buchanan or someone like him (the "I wish he'd just shut up and go away" or "oh no, here he goes again...") and flip that around. THAT'S how many feel about Jackson. A divisive, flamethrowing pot-stirrer, full of equal parts crap and hot air.
Does that kinda put it into some context?
He's done next to nothing, but yet is often hailed as the end-all/be-all of black opinion and leadership.
He's anything but and, glad to say, most black people I know see right through his crap.
Objectivity is not the issue here. The belittlement of black leaders is the issue.
The conservative talk radio/ Fox News/ Drudge Report megaphone has made the belittlement of black leaders one its priorities.
Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson are the two most ridiculed black leaders on TV and radio.
There's a difference between journalistic objectivity and journalistic integrity.
No one should get a free ride, but when have the attacks on Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton ever been legitimate? Mostly, they're not.
Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson are the two most ridiculed black leaders on TV and radio.
maybe because they're both jackasses?
sometimes you are mocked for being a dumbass, nothing more.
Originally posted by ShawnPatrickJoyce
Take a hike.
Objectivity is not the issue here. The belittlement of black leaders is the issue.
The conservative talk radio/ Fox News/ Drudge Report megaphone has made the belittlement of black leaders one its priorities.
Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson are the two most ridiculed black leaders on TV and radio.
There's a difference between journalistic objectivity and journalistic integrity.
No one should get a free ride, but when have the attacks on Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton ever been legitimate? Mostly, they're not.
Yeah, and just look at how Fox News/Drudge ridiculed Larry Elder and Alan Keyes. That was just terrible too.... oh wait you don't consider them black leaders do you?
Nick
Perhaps I missed Fox News' criticism-in-passing *nudge nudge, wink wink* of Alan Keyes, but do you honestly contend that Jackson and Sharpton are not the two most ridiculed black leaders?
...and mostly for no good reason.
"Did you hear Jesse Jackson diss our Founding Fathers the other day!"
That wasn't his ****ing point!
Originally posted by ShawnPatrickJoyce
Take a hike.
What are you, Ritchie Cunningham now? May as well tell me to "sit on it".
Objectivity is not the issue here. The belittlement of black leaders is the issue.
Yeah, and? I can't think of two "black leaders" who deserve it more. Sorry, that's coming from a longtime Alan Keyes supporter/admirer, so I admit my bias. Those two clowns couldn't carry Mr. Keyes' lunch.
The conservative talk radio/ Fox News/ Drudge Report megaphone has made the belittlement of black leaders one its priorities.
I'd like to see that somewhere. Oh, wait...just stupid or corrupt black leaders. Well, you're half right. Hey, your odds are improving!
Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson are the two most ridiculed black leaders on TV and radio.
Anyone know of a good reason that they SHOULDN'T be? Just curious...
There's a difference between journalistic objectivity and journalistic integrity.
Hey, I agree 100%. While you're thinking about that, relay that to your buddies at the New York Times and CNN.
No one should get a free ride, but when have the attacks on Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton ever been legitimate? Mostly, they're not.
Questioning Jackson's finances is off-limits and "bad form", then? Questioning or bringing to light his "shakedown" tactics he uses on certain companies and organizations to "play his way"? His pathological fixation with microphones and TV cameras? His inserting himself into situations where he's not been asked? His wrongheaded, don't-work-and-never-have views on any number of issues? His rush to ALWAYS get on the side of anyone he thinks is being "done wrong", even if that means showing up to support some thugs who started a brawl in a high-school football bleacher that injured others?
Yes, all completely illegitimate attacks and charges. Every one. He's a saint and a great man, and I'm just not seeing it.
And that's just Jesse. Shall I proceed with Mr. Sharpton?
He advocates civil unions, and I don't think many Republicans would have a problem with that. I think religions types (myself included) have trouble with the word marriage. Call it a civil union and give it the exact same legal rights and I have no problem with it.
He seems pretty hard-line on no more gun control.
He is very pro-choice, but how can you not expect this for a Democratic presidential candidate.
His "universal health care" is basically expanding eligibility for state and federal programs.
I just don't see what would get people's panties in a bunch about him.
Nick
I said that no one should be immune to criticism, but most of the attacks on Jackson and Sharpton have not been legitimate.
In so many circles he's so shielded and untouchable, that it's nice to see him treated without kid gloves. It is a rarity in the mainstream press. I see just as many white liberals lining up to touch his robe or kiss his boots as I do many blacks.
That's when I tend to REALLY want to throw up.
[Chachi]Wa, wa, wa[/Chachi]
Go Al!!!!