An anonymous comment was posted here this morning, though the person who penned it hid behind a pseudonym, Robert Throckmorton (the comment seems to have come through a server in Ames, Iowa, caucus country). And the comment suggested that I was paranoid and full of something like digested hay for thinking (see my essay here) that the Imus story was much bigger than race and sex (and that these were even distractions). The issue, I augured, was that this is about who will be the next president. (And I augured even more than this.)
Let me remind readers that Don Imus constantly referred to Hillary Clinton as "Satan." As wrong or as unfortunate as this may be, Mr. Throckmorton thinks that I am paranoid for thinking that Ms. Clinton benefits -- supremely -- from Don Imus' silence.
Now note this: Ms. Clinton is going to speak at Rutgers on Monday. Yes, I know. Paranoid delusions on my part.
This is all about winning -- for Ms. Clinton. She is, in her own words, in the presidential campaign "to win." As if there is any other option. So, desperately seeking affirmation and the prize, Ms. Clinton is going to steal the limelight -- steal it from a Rutgers women's basketball team, from Al Sharpton, from Don Imus and from Barack Obama. No doubt Ms. Clinton can exploit commiseration to great effect, for she -- all female -- has also been the victim of Don Imus' sexism. That this whole story used to be about a runner-up basketball team whose achievements were overshadowed by the easily ignorable comments of an old white guy is worth noting, particularly since it is no longer about that at all, proving, at last, that it never was. Surely Ms. Clinton has heard that the Rutgers team has accepted Mr. Imus' apology, and that they'd like to move on and get on with living -- and on with the celebration the team still richly deserves. But that has no place in her campaign, for the limelight she is going to steal is about to be rather large and rather bright: the media presence at Rutgers will be so overpowering that it will be hard not to believe that Ms. Clinton already is president. Perfect.
Of course, no one dare suggest that Ms. Clinton is going to exploit the misfortunes of a group of women who have accepted an apology. After all, it may be the case that the Rutgers team has given Imus some sort of absolution, but that does not mean all other women have to follow their example: Other women can still hold a grudge against the I-man.
It's funny. I have been apologetic to Contratimes readers for speculating beyond the prima facie evidence of this whole story. Clearly my paranoia is rooted in some shallow soil. The soil of reality.
But I may still be wrong.
Alas! One more paranoid tidbit: Hillary Clinton, according to the report cited above, has had a longstanding open invitation to speak to the "The Eagleton Center for American Women and Politics" at Rutgers. Can anyone say "motive?" I can.
Odd that I should have been speculating that the machinery behind Don Imus' sudden fall was larger than Al Sharpton. I now see why.
I wonder, Mr. Throckmorton, what you see.
Peace.
(Still experimenting, so bear with me.)
©Bill Gnade 2007/Contratimes. All Rights Reserved.
Technorati tags:
Don Imus, Racism, Rutgers Basketball, Al Sharpton, Language, Censorship, Hillary Clinton, Reparations, Sexism, Bigotry, CBS, MSNBC, Presidential Politics, Barack Obama, Charles McCord, Bernard McGuirk, Al Sharpton, Sid Rosenberg
5 comments:
Conspiracy nuts have an odor about them. At risk of sounding self-exalting, I think I normally smell them in about half a second.
There are conspiracy nuts on the left (the 9-11 was a hoax crowd) and on the right (George Bush is forming a one-world government).
Our host-poster here, doesn't smell to me, on this one. So, either my sense of smell is off or Thockmorten's is.
Here's why the original "paranoid" post rings possible. The Clintons have a public modus-operandi. They have a record. They have former henchmen who have gone public with their attitudes and tactics. Some lines of evidence to follow include:
> character assassination of all the "bimbo erruptions." These women were "trailer trash" and liars, all.
> The intimidation of Monica Lewinski's friend (forgot her name already --getting old)-- the one who recorded phone conversations with Monica. People actually threatening to kill her pets! Insane.
> The destruction of Billy Dale's character --which was later vindicated in court.
> Insider information from people like Arkansas State Troopers, Dick Morris, et al.
> Observation of the handling of many issues: they are willing to lie, under oath or on t.v. ("vast right-wing conspiracy against my husband" "I did not have sex with that woman" etc). Billing records that show up when the statute of limitations is up.
> their friends. Many of their friends become their enemies very quickly, and many of those friends end up in jail (or dead). why is that?
> They love to rake up dirt. Now, I know this is not exclusive to Clintons, but for them, it is indeed an art. Examples are too numerous to discuss.
> These are ruthless people. They don't play with their opponents, they crush them. They love power. They love it in a stalinist way. They love it more than most. They love it more than any recognized system of morality.
So, I join the ranks of the suspicious on this one.
Not for one minute do I believe you are paranoid. Media Matters brought Imus down. Some of Media Matters donors are Susie Tompkins Buell (founder of Esprit and close friend of Hillary's) and John Podesta (former Clinton administration chief of staff). If you're interested in the details of this story, check it out here: http://www.sweetness-light.com/archive/more-on-media-matters-role-in-the-downfall-of-don-imus
Bill, I have only just begun reading your Imus series, but I am beginning to enjoy it. For now, I wish only to share, here, the letter that I just wrote to my local paper about this incident:
-----------
So far, Don Imus has only been a victim of the free market. His employers fired him of their own free will. They were not forced to do so by our government. And it is quite possible that Imus will quickly take advantage of that market again, and make a comeback, as he has in the past. But as long as he is not broadcasting on mainstream airwaves, we will be deprived of a man who felt comfortable saying this about Newt Gingrich: "A man who would eat road kill". And this, about Ted Kennedy: "A fat slob with a head the size of a Dumpster".
Obviously, the silencing of a voice like that is highly beneficial to those who control our media and our government. They will, for a time, no longer have to tangle with a man who is willing to use harsh, expressive language to lambast the egos of the pompous and the powerful. I believe that is part of what Imus' firing really means. This is a botched, pathetic attempt to sweep racism and sexism under the rug (as opposed to dealing with bigotry intelligently in the marketplace of ideas), but I believe it is also an attempt to cleanse the American language of all its power to offend. And when one cleanses a language of all its power to offend, one is left with a language that, in many crucial situations, is utterly powerless to express the truth.
This isn't just about punishing one broadcaster for his poor judgement: it is also about ridding American life of all its craziness, and all its poetry. What we are witnessing is a cowardly refusal: a refusal to grapple with the messiness and imperfection of our always-tenuous right to free speech.
----------
--Luke
PS--This letter is also available on my blog, under a rather bombastic title.
I have a friend who thinks the Bush Admin. is behind the Imus fiasco. That could be; Imus has called Bush & Cheney "war crimminals" and I believe they are. But Satan is just on her way to a possible (shudder) 4 to 8 year run. Bush is on his way out and I don't think he cares what people think of him.
The Clintons to me are despicable people. They let their "friends" always take the fall for them; they lie like it's their first nature, and don't forget their "team" trashed the White House when their tenure ended. They are trash; Satan is not a respectable female role model; she rode on her husband's coattails as she could never make it one her own. She let him humiliate her in front of the whole world because without him she wouldn't be where she is now. I will do everything to make sure she does not get to the White House again. And I would never vote for anyone who has a "Hussein" linked to his name!!!
You have it exactly right on the Imus firing. And Imus had it right in his assessment of Hillary as well. It will be a sad day in America if she is elected president. She wants all opposing voices blotted out and Imus had her pegged. She has the organization to take him out and she is ruthless.
Post a Comment