18 responses so far ↓

• 1 Heather // May 10, 2007 at 1:28 pm

  Who is the guest?

  Do men really sit around and talk like this? I mean, if they’ll do this on the air, what are they brewing up in private?

  Gag.

• 2 WMD // May 10, 2007 at 1:38 pm

  attn: Tony Penny

  i am no fan of Jesse et al (don’t know who you mean by et al), but it is wrong to make this unverified statement: “Jesse, Al, et al, will have nothing whatsoever to say about this.”

  1) do you have any proof they have been made aware of these XM radio shock jocks statements

  and

  2) do you have any proof that they subsequently refused to comment

  if you can answer (1) and (2), maybe you can substantiate your allegation

  if you cannot answer (1) and (2), you have to some degree committed a crime similar to these XM shock jocks (and Imus)

• 3 Tony Penny // May 10, 2007 at 2:23 pm

  WMD,

  Good questions. Thought I’m not sure how much I can “verify” a prediction other than to look at past history. I haven’t spoken to Jesse or Al lately so I don’t know if they’ve been monitoring the news or if someone on their staff has brought this to their attention, but my guess is that if/when this blows up into a big thing, they will hear about it and will say and do nothing. I base that allegation only on past vicious and vile comments made about the Secretary of State by shock jocks and political cartoonists that received absolutely no attention (i.e., threats of boycotts, meetings with the jocks or cartoonists or newspaper publishers, calls for the immediate dismissal of same) from Jesse, Al, or any other “Civil Rights Leader.” My prediction is that they will do nothing to defend Dr. Rice against these disgusting comments either. Sean Hannity, a nationally syndicated right winger talk show host and intellectual midget, has had Rev. Sharpton on his show (both radio and TV) many times and to my knowledge Sharpton has never come to the defense of the Secretary against these kinds of attacks. Of course I could be proven wrong if Sharpton and Jackson take the same firm stance against O&A that they did against Michael Richards and Don Imus.

  Now, to suggest that my speculation about the reaction (or lack thereof) from Jackson and Sharpton somehow puts me even to some degree on par with Opie & Anthony and Don Imus would be laughable if it weren’t so ludicrous.

• 4 WMD // May 10, 2007 at 2:53 pm

  attn: Tony Penny

  interesting write up Tony

  but i think that you overlooked three very, very important issues

  the first stop on the propaganda highway, isn’t Jesse, Al Sharp et al

  the first stop is the desk of the corporate mainstream media offices (that are NOT controlled by Jesse et al). it’s these desk jockey’s who make the determination if this Condi story should or should not have “legs”

  if they decide that the Condi story merits the public’s attention, it is they (NOT Jesse et al) who determines who and who not will be allowed to comment (mold the publics opinion)

  so you gotta focus your attention on the decision making process of the gate keepers and not be misdirected by unproven suppositions

  the second issue is that Jesse et al have criticized these sorts of comments but if it not amplified by the corporate mainstream media, its appear to many (including you) that Jesseet al have been silent

  the third issue is that while Opie and Andy made inflammatory remarks like Imus, the Imus show is different ’cause the establishment made the Imus show their roost.

  and, it became unacceptable for the establishment to “seen” in the company of Imus and thus endorsing Imus

  if Opie and Andy were an “establishment” show, nowadays there would be a similar outrage

  side note: the movie “Birth of a Nation” would not have been a besy seller of President Wilson had not given it his imprimatur (i assume that you know the content and social impact of this movie)

• 5 WMD // May 10, 2007 at 3:01 pm

  attn: Tony

  “Now, to suggest that my speculation about the reaction (or lack thereof) from Jackson and Sharpton somehow puts me even to some degree on par with Opie & Anthony and Don Imus would be laughable if it weren’t so ludicrous.”

  Imus made inflammatory statements about about the Rutgers women’s basketball team – a group of people whom he had no first hand knowledge

  Opie and Andi made inflammatory statements about Sec. State Rice -a person whom they had no first hand knowledge about

  you, Tony Penny, made inflammatory statements about Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton – two people whom you admit you have no first knowledge about their opinions about Opie & Andi vis-a-vi Sec. State Rice

  your Honor, the prosecution now rests its case

• 6 Tony Penny // May 10, 2007 at 3:03 pm

  WMD,

  1)I agree that the first stop on the propaganda highway is the MSM desk jockey. That said, information is everywhere these days and I’m sure that Jackson and Sharpton by now have heard of this, or soon will even it it’s only if/when some right wing talker gets a hold of it and solicits a comment from them today, tomorrow, or Monday.

  2)Please provide me with evidence that Jesse and Sharpton have denounced these kinds of comments about Sec. Rice TO THE SAME OR GREATER DEGREE they went after Michael Richards and Don Imus. You may well be right, I just haven’t seen it.

  3)Good point on Imus’ establishment credentials, even though his poor ratings belied any such influence, as well as BOAN’s Wilson connection. But this isn’t the first time O&A have gotten into trouble either, so while the establishment may not care because they’re not cozy with these goons, the MSM may in fact pick this up for its shock value which should lead to some sort of reaction from Jackson and Sharpton…or not.

• 7 Tony Penny // May 10, 2007 at 3:07 pm

  Your honor, I request a 3 day recess to see if, in fact, my speculation about the lack of a zealous response from Revs. Jackson and Sharpton will be proven true.

  Imus spoke of a group of women’s sexual promiscuity (”ho”) about which he had no prior knowledge. I have enough prior knowledge of Sharpton and Jackson’s hypocrisy to speculate that they won’t give a damn what anyone says about Sec. Rice.

• 8 WMD // May 10, 2007 at 3:25 pm

  you got me LMOA

  anyway, while we are taking a legal recess (i.e. a couple of tall Mint Juleps), please do some research on my dear friend Rush Limbaugh

  his show is a reliable platform for the conservative and the right-wing and the Republican establishment

  a repeat guest happens to be an ordinary citizen of the USA – Richard Cheney

  btw – what do you think about the comments made by Rush Limbaugh about Obama (the Barack the Magic Negro paradoy)?

• 9 Tony Penny // May 10, 2007 at 3:42 pm

  I think that Rush is a bloviating windbag, unfunny (which is not the same as offensive, which I don’t find him to be…although trying to be funny and failing IS a little offensive to me), and, it would appear, inconsequential in turning out votes for Republicans OR Conservatives.

  I posted the original “Magic Negro” article a couple of months back (http://www.charlescountycafe.com/?p=426). I think that Rush was parodying that article and its sentiment. I didn’t find it offensive, nor do I find his calling Obama and Halle Berry “halfrican Americans” because of their biracial heritage offensive. I am biracial, too. While I find O&A vulgar and, from the little I heard, unfunny, I would no sooner seek their dismissal as I would Imus. The market will bear it, or it won’t.

  Do you find Rush to be any different than Imus in tone?

• 10 richardgwhite // May 10, 2007 at 5:31 pm

  Rush, Imus and O&A…all unfunny imbeciles.

• 11 WMD // May 10, 2007 at 5:52 pm

  attn: Tony

  “Do you find Rush to be any different than Imus in tone?”

  the main problem that i have with them, Rush and Imus, isn’t really “with them”

  the problem i have is that the establishment, decision makers for our society (the MSM talking heads, the Congressmen, the Senators, the Presidential candidates, the Vice President, the heads of influential corporations, etc.) legitimate their subtle forms of prejudice and the evils that flow from that attitude

  that is why i gave you the example of President Woodrow Wilson endorsing “Birth of a Nation”

  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birth_of_a_nation

• 12 WMD // May 10, 2007 at 6:12 pm

  attn: Richard and Tony

  although you may find Rush Limbaugh “unfunny”, there are many who listen to him daily (over 10 million each week) and are influenced by him

  more importantly, your “unfunny” friend influences policy and elections via his listeners

  Rush Limbaugh – unfunny and very influential

• 13 richardgwhite // May 10, 2007 at 6:19 pm

  Yeah and?

• 14 WMD // May 10, 2007 at 6:27 pm

  attn: Richard

  “Yeah and?”

  we can all sit here, like you and Tony, and make a sound critique that Limbaugh is indeed “unfunny”

  but, this is NOT what our analysis should focus upon

  its like your previous ad-hominems on President Bush

  our analysis should focus upon the influence/affect that people like Rush Limbaugh and President Bush have on the US electorate (this type of propaganda duped you!!!)

  if we fail to do such insight, then we will continue on the path of self-destruction

• 15 richardgwhite // May 10, 2007 at 6:36 pm

  Forgive us if in our ignorance we neglect to follow your lead.

• 16 WMD // May 10, 2007 at 6:47 pm

  att: Richard

  you don’t and will never need my forgiveness and you don’t and will never need my leadership

  but, i wonder who led these people http://www.nooniefortin.com/iraq.htm and how do we forgive ourselves

• 17 Tony Penny // May 10, 2007 at 8:10 pm

  WMD, please tell me what elections Rush has influenced. Clinton was elected not once but twice and the Republican lost control of congress in the last election. Not the best record for “El Rushbo”.

• 18 richardgwhite // May 10, 2007 at 8:17 pm

  Yeah!

You must log in to post a comment.