If you take vitamins or dietary supplements, or utilize any non-prescription health aids, or if you are simply interested in forestalling the rapidly encroaching destruction of what used to be our individual rights, then please read this, and DO SOMETHING.
The sponsors of this legislation are holding a "voice vote" in the Senate today- and we need to call or fax or email immediately.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Major Expansion of FDA Powers will Target Dietary Supplements
http://www.lef.org/featured-articles/consumer_alert_042707.htm
A new attack against health freedom, drug safety, and dietary supplements was launched last week by Senator Edward Kennedy (D-MA) with major support from Michael Enzi (R-WY). It is called the Food and Drug Administration Revitalization Act (S1082). This legislation was planned over the past few years working hand-in-glove with the FDA’s dysfunctional management and legal team – meaning this legislation was written for the profits of Big Pharma and Big Biotech AT THE EXPENSE OF SAFETY AND HUMAN HEALTH.
S1082 is a Trojan Horse bill that pretends to address safety issues. Unbelievably, the bill turns the FDA into a drug development company that will expose Americans to new and dangerous biological drugs that have little testing to prove safety or effectiveness. And to top it off, the bill gives broad new regulatory powers to the FDA that can be used to frivolously attack dietary supplements and forward the FDA management’s anti-American globalization agenda.
On April 18, 2007, S1082 was approved by the HELP committee (which Kennedy and Enzi control) and now moves to the floor of the Senate. In a slick move, Kennedy has attached his long-planned FDA/Big Pharma “reform” measures to the renewal of PDUFA (Prescription Drug User Fee Act). Current PDUFA law expires later this year and must be reviewed by Congress. PDUFA allows Big Pharma to pay the FDA fees to speed the approval of its drugs. The new Kennedy bill will increase these FDA bribes to 380 million dollars in 2008, well over 50% of the FDA budget for new drug approvals. This is like paying the mob for protection. Kennedy, by replacing the existing PDUFA law with this new bill (S1082), is ensuring that his twisted legislation is the one that will be put before the Senate for a vote.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
IAHF
http://www.nocodexgenocide.com/nocodexgenocide.html
Senator Ted Kennedy has decided to GUT the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act of 1994 (DSHEA) tomorrow, Monday, April 30th at 4:30 pm when S.1082 is scheduled to come to an unrecorded voice vote in the Senate.Kennedy doesn't want us to see how our Senators voted on this voluminous 262 page piece of legislation. Since no conference report was issued as of Friday afternoon, your Senators have no idea what lurks within this bill, but it was scrutinized by myself, Byron Richards, and noted attorney Jonathan Emord who has offered a simple amendment that could at least partially protect us.
This is easily the most Orwellian piece of legislation to come at us since the Patriot Act and it is essential that you follow the simple steps below to oppose it (plus read and massively forward this mssg) if you wish to maintain access to the dietary supplements of your choice. Byron Richards has complete details in his latest article on News With Views below my comments, but to simplify things, and to help you to ACT NOW, IAHF is providing you with the SIMPLE set of EASY TO FOLLOW instructions here---- This battle is goint to extend into the House- it won't be over tomorrow April 30th- and Senate business could keep it from reaching the floor tomorrow, but we must ACT as if it COULD. Also- Go to the LEF Website to Send The New Form Letter that Will be On Their Front Page Under Consumer Alerts By Monday AM to your own Senators and Congressman, and if You Don't See it, use this one: http://www.lef.org/featured-articles/consumer_alert_042707.htm Please forward this massively and take action immediately.
This is for ALL the MARBLES and it is NOT a drill. Urge everyone you know to sign on to the IAHF list for updates at http://www.iahf.com and please send emergency donations to IAHF via paypal at http://www.iahf.com/index1.html or via IAHF 556 Boundary Bay Rd. Point Roberts WA 98281 USA, the life you save could be your own- an emergency trip to the Hill could be necessary to try to kill this in the House if we fail to kill it in the Senate and I'm 3000 miles from DC.
Senators Hatch and Harkin were the sponsors of the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act of 1994 (DHSEA) which stands to be SNUFFED OUT by S.1082.
Form letters sent by email are fine, and I want you to send the one below, but theres NO SUBSTITUTE for IMPASSIONED PLEAS issued by PHONE!
WHAT TO DO:
Call Senators Hatch and Harkin IMMEDIATELY via the Capital Switchboard at 202-225-3121. Ask to be connected.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"If the FDA adopts this proposal, all natural health care would be illegal even for medical doctors; all natural health care would be criminal in one way or another. Anyone else who advises, advocates, counsels, distributes, markets, recommends or suggests anybody use "medicine" is practicing medicine without a license. This is a felony in the USA punishable by fines and incarceration.
You can read FDA’s proposed Draft Guidance for Industry on Complementary and Alternative Medicine Products and Their Regulation by the Food and Drug Administration here.
This guidance document details PDA’s plans to regulate virtually all herbs and supplements as drugs if they actually benefit a medical condition of a man or other animal. Believe it or not, the FDA has even targeted juice! If you plan to drink it "to promote optimal health", juice would be a "food subject to…the Act and FDA regulations." If you plan to drink juice "as part of a disease treatment regimen" juice would be "subject to regulation as a drug under the Act."
You would no longer dare recommend anyone drink cranberry juice to help with a bladder infection. And please remember, water cures dehydration!
Follow the Money!
The FDA wants to put your wallet, and your throat, within reach of Big Pharma’s greedy, fat fingers. According to the National Institutes of Health, over 1/3 of all American adults use some form of alternative therapy, spending tens of billions of out-of-pocket (read, not refunded by insurance) dollars annually. Americans now spend more on "Complimentary and Alternative Modalities" than they do on standard (allopathic) healthcare professionals. Consumers know that readily available vitamins, minerals, herbs, and supplements are often just as effective (if not more so) as the drugs without the harmful side effects..."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
FDA WANTS TO ELIMINATE NATURAL HEALTH CARE
http://www.newswithviews.com/DeWeese/tom81.htm
By Tom DeWeese
April 25, 2007
NewsWithViews.com
The Federal Drug Administration (FDA) has launched another sneak-attack, trying to regulate your health freedom into oblivion. Through FDA’s unholy partnerships with Big Pharma and the Codex Alimentarius Commission (an offshoot of the UN), we are very close to losing alternative health care in America. This is a crisis, and needs your immediate action.
In 1994 Congress passed the Dietary Supplement Heath and Education Act (DSHEA), voting unanimously to protect your health care choices, in response to 2.5 million ordinary citizens demanding dietary supplements stay on the over-the-counter market.
The FDA is trying to end-run the DSHEA, and regulate you out from under Congress’ severe limitations on the authority the FDA has over items currently classified as "food" (and therefore presumed to be safe) including dietary supplements and herbs. DSHEA currently provides the FDA with plenty of legal authority to remove any herb or supplement from the market anytime the agency can show REAL evidence of REAL harm to the public.
The Codex Alimentarius Commission is working to "harmonize" food and supplement rules, pulling our American health care system down to the level of Third World nations. Under Codex rules, even basic vitamins and minerals will require a doctor’s prescription. As Europe moves ever closer to adopting Codex standards, it becomes more likely that the World Trade Organization will attempt to force those standards on the United States. This is yet another example of how the WTO threatens American sovereignty. By cooperating with Codex, the FDA is blatantly ignoring the will of Congress and the American people, hoping to overpower both through their fascistic "partnerships."
If the FDA adopts this proposal, all natural health care would be illegal even for medical doctors; all natural health care would be criminal in one way or another. Anyone else who advises, advocates, counsels, distributes, markets, recommends or suggests anybody use "medicine" is practicing medicine without a license. This is a felony in the USA punishable by fines and incarceration.
You can read FDA’s proposed Draft Guidance for Industry on Complementary and Alternative Medicine Products and Their Regulation by the Food and Drug Administration (.pdf), or view the document here.
This guidance document details PDA’s plans to regulate virtually all herbs and supplements as drugs if they actually benefit a medical condition of a man or other animal. Believe it or not, the FDA has even targeted juice! If you plan to drink it "to promote optimal health", juice would be a "food subject to…the Act and FDA regulations." If you plan to drink juice "as part of a disease treatment regimen" juice would be "subject to regulation as a drug under the Act."
You would no longer dare recommend anyone drink cranberry juice to help with a bladder infection. And please remember, water cures dehydration!
Follow the Money!
The FDA wants to put your wallet, and your throat, within reach of Big Pharma’s greedy, fat fingers. According to the National Institutes of Health, over 1/3 of all American adults use some form of alternative therapy, spending tens of billions of out-of-pocket (read, not refunded by insurance) dollars annually. Americans now spend more on "Complimentary and Alternative Modalities" than they do on standard (allopathic) healthcare professionals. Consumers know that readily available vitamins, minerals, herbs, and supplements are often just as effective (if not more so) as the drugs without the harmful side effects.
Past attendees of recent Freedom21 conferences have heard Dr. Carolyn Dean, Dr. Madeleine Pelner Cosman (now deceased), and Henry Lamb talk about the little-known aspect of Agenda 21 known as Sustainable Medicine. If you don’t yet understand Sustainable Medicine, you had better educate yourself, as the UN expects you to accept their "lowered expectations" for your health care. You see, it’s just not fair for Americans to have better health care than the rest of the world.
If you value your health freedom you have only very little time to raise your voice. If you wait for someone else to protect your health freedom, you risk losing the freedom you now enjoy – freedom that is the envy of the world.
ACTION TO TAKE:
I assert my fundamental right to control my own health and health care. I want Complementary and Alternative Modalities ("CAM") to be freely available.
Submit comments on the draft guidance to the Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
OR, submit electronic comments to: [Click here]
Tell the FDA:
*
The American PEOPLE do not want the FDA regulating their alternative health care options.
*
You will NOT submit to Codex-type regulations.
*
Their "thinking," as expressed in the Draft Guidance, is irrelevant. As a federal agency, their "thinking" should be to follow the will of Congress! OR, in other words,
*
BACK OFF!
Finally, add Cc: Representative (Senator) _______________, so the FDA knows you’ve contacted your Congressmen.
Your comments must reference "FDA Docket No. 2006D-0480", and must be submitted by April 30, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Philip L. Chao, Office of Policy and Planning (HF-23), Food and Drug Administration, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857, 301-827-0587.
1, It is urgent that you contact your own Congressman. You can write your Representative and Senator as below: Office of Congressman (Name)
United States House of Representatives
Washington, DC 20515
Office of Senator (Name)
United States Senate
Washington, D.C. 20510
You may phone the United States Capitol switchboard at (202) 224-3121. A switchboard operator will connect you directly with the Senate or House office you request. Or,
You can send an e-mail by going to each member’s website.
Tell them, First) you want your fundamental right to control your own health and health care protected; Second) you want the FDA reminded that their Draft Guidance violates the will of Congress, and the American people; and Third) it would be politically most unwise not to support and protect the health care choices of most American voters.
1.
Urge everyone in your personal and professional circles of influence to protect their health freedom – their personal right to make their own health choices.
2.
It is also important to email the manufacturers of the health care products you take. Ask them to alert their suppliers and customer base, to protect their businesses.
3.
Make sure your health care providers know of FDA’s fascist attempt to put them out of business. They need to alert their patients and colleagues, too.
URGENT! Please take action today and pass this alert on to at least 10 more people.
Related Article:
1, Feds eye control of vitamins, supplements – even water!
2, US Health Freedom on Verge of Collapse
© 2007 Tom DeWeese - All Rights Reserved
Tom DeWeese is president of the American Policy Center and Editor of The DeWeese Report , 70 Main Street, Suite 23, Warrenton Virginia.
(540) 342-8911
E-Mail: apcmail@americanpolicy.org
Website: www.americanpolicy.org
Read more!!
Monday, April 30, 2007
Friday, April 27, 2007
DRANT #226: MOYERS' WILLFUL IGNORANCE
I recently sent you all a heads up about the Bill Moyers special that aired last night on PBS. (Transcript and replay HERE.)
For this I am deeply ashamed, and I apologize.
I told you that this would be a good thing to watch, that it would shed some needed light on the media industrial governmental conspiracy to sell the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.
Well, I was wrong. Wrong squared. I suspended my disbelief for one minute, put my bullshit detector on pause, and bammo.
The Moyers show was a gigantic crock of shit.
He committed precisely the same egregious errors he so piously attributed to the bad guys. He sold us a lie.
Only ONE sentence of anything approaching the real truth was allowed to stick its head outside the sheets of complicity that shrouded Moyers' whitewash.
Only Phil Donahue said it: "It's good for business."
Moyers played the same game which got us into Iraq, and has gotten us into myriad wars of overthrow and regime change since the nineteenth century.
(The concept of the "embedded" journalist was in fact created in the nefarious Mexican War of 1848.)
Moyers limited his sources to the same major media co conspirators (CBS, CNN, Wash Post, NY Times) who colluded last time, and have colluded every single time the Government and their big business bosses have decided it was "good for business" to have a war.
He paraded Dan Rather and many similar pimp media Meas who Culpa'ed all over the screen, but Moyers never got to the true story.
The war, as all others before it, was begun solely to further the venal and rapacious interests of American business and power.
The war was justified on totally mendacious grounds, invented by the government, and spread like fungus by major media.
The major media depends on the kindness and advertising of the very people who benefit the most from the war, and it participated with great vigor in the selling of the war and its justification, moral and otherwise.
The business interests that wanted the war, paid the government, and elected officials to create a scenario where the war could be justified and prosecuted.
The business interests that wanted the war, paid the media and its journalists to not just go along but play a strong and active role in selling the lie.
One so-called "progressive" voice was heard- that of Norman Solomon, ( of the so-called Progessive Democrats, if your stomach can take it) who got the job of explaining gosh how did this all happen ? Solomon appears to be angling to run for something pretty soon. He has turned to a Politicians' Ptolemaic Progressiveness-- perchance he will run on the Ostrich Party ticket.
Well, Norman explained, "we were all bamboozled."
Oh.
Bam f----cking boozled !!!!!!!!!
Well, that sho nuff splains that one Lucy.
Never mentioned: the hundreds, the thousands of anti war blogs, organizations, newspapers, monthlies, writers, and just plain folks, who saw and loudly and demonstratively spoke the truth and who were purposefully ignored, derided-- and often persecuted- for their actions.
Never even whispered: the fact that millions of people marched and demonstrated and fought to stop the wars.
Moyers did exactly what he accused the bad guys of doing- he pursued a willful ignorance, refusing to recognize or reveal that many of us were right, and were loud and were ubiquitous, and were purposely ignored by ALL of those who benefited from the war.
The facts were all out there. WE were not bamboozled. WE were ignored, vilified, and hounded by Homeland Security.
The press did not snooze. The press was not fooled, nor bamboozled nor tricked.
It is not enough that these whores apologize.
Apology NOT accepted.
What are they gonna DO about it ? Thass what I wanna know.
Selling us another pile of doggie poop and telling us its Mount Ararat is NOT gonna be OK.
Moyers and PBS proved to be two more allies in selling us the big lie, and should be hounded outta town for it.
Even better, they should be ignored.
We have serious and brilliant sources for truth available to anyone and everyone.
They are NOT on network or cable TV.
They are NOT printed by giant corporations.
You KNOW where to find the truth, and ignorance is no excuse.
Shame on Moyers, and shame on me for suggesting you watch it.
Time to go and read something real.
You know where to find it, but if you don't, I'll be very happy to send you a list.
It's all free. Our lives depend on it.
Read more!!
For this I am deeply ashamed, and I apologize.
I told you that this would be a good thing to watch, that it would shed some needed light on the media industrial governmental conspiracy to sell the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.
Well, I was wrong. Wrong squared. I suspended my disbelief for one minute, put my bullshit detector on pause, and bammo.
The Moyers show was a gigantic crock of shit.
He committed precisely the same egregious errors he so piously attributed to the bad guys. He sold us a lie.
Only ONE sentence of anything approaching the real truth was allowed to stick its head outside the sheets of complicity that shrouded Moyers' whitewash.
Only Phil Donahue said it: "It's good for business."
Moyers played the same game which got us into Iraq, and has gotten us into myriad wars of overthrow and regime change since the nineteenth century.
(The concept of the "embedded" journalist was in fact created in the nefarious Mexican War of 1848.)
Moyers limited his sources to the same major media co conspirators (CBS, CNN, Wash Post, NY Times) who colluded last time, and have colluded every single time the Government and their big business bosses have decided it was "good for business" to have a war.
He paraded Dan Rather and many similar pimp media Meas who Culpa'ed all over the screen, but Moyers never got to the true story.
The war, as all others before it, was begun solely to further the venal and rapacious interests of American business and power.
The war was justified on totally mendacious grounds, invented by the government, and spread like fungus by major media.
The major media depends on the kindness and advertising of the very people who benefit the most from the war, and it participated with great vigor in the selling of the war and its justification, moral and otherwise.
The business interests that wanted the war, paid the government, and elected officials to create a scenario where the war could be justified and prosecuted.
The business interests that wanted the war, paid the media and its journalists to not just go along but play a strong and active role in selling the lie.
One so-called "progressive" voice was heard- that of Norman Solomon, ( of the so-called Progessive Democrats, if your stomach can take it) who got the job of explaining gosh how did this all happen ? Solomon appears to be angling to run for something pretty soon. He has turned to a Politicians' Ptolemaic Progressiveness-- perchance he will run on the Ostrich Party ticket.
Well, Norman explained, "we were all bamboozled."
Oh.
Bam f----cking boozled !!!!!!!!!
Well, that sho nuff splains that one Lucy.
Never mentioned: the hundreds, the thousands of anti war blogs, organizations, newspapers, monthlies, writers, and just plain folks, who saw and loudly and demonstratively spoke the truth and who were purposefully ignored, derided-- and often persecuted- for their actions.
Never even whispered: the fact that millions of people marched and demonstrated and fought to stop the wars.
Moyers did exactly what he accused the bad guys of doing- he pursued a willful ignorance, refusing to recognize or reveal that many of us were right, and were loud and were ubiquitous, and were purposely ignored by ALL of those who benefited from the war.
The facts were all out there. WE were not bamboozled. WE were ignored, vilified, and hounded by Homeland Security.
The press did not snooze. The press was not fooled, nor bamboozled nor tricked.
It is not enough that these whores apologize.
Apology NOT accepted.
What are they gonna DO about it ? Thass what I wanna know.
Selling us another pile of doggie poop and telling us its Mount Ararat is NOT gonna be OK.
Moyers and PBS proved to be two more allies in selling us the big lie, and should be hounded outta town for it.
Even better, they should be ignored.
We have serious and brilliant sources for truth available to anyone and everyone.
They are NOT on network or cable TV.
They are NOT printed by giant corporations.
You KNOW where to find the truth, and ignorance is no excuse.
Shame on Moyers, and shame on me for suggesting you watch it.
Time to go and read something real.
You know where to find it, but if you don't, I'll be very happy to send you a list.
It's all free. Our lives depend on it.
Read more!!
Wednesday, April 18, 2007
DRANT #225: MASS MURDER TODAY
There was mass murder committed today.Insane meaningless indiscriminate killing of defenseless innocent people.
Blood everywhere, bodies and lives torn apart.
Horrific screams from the victims, the witnesses and the next of kin.
Indefensible inhuman and pitiless mass murder.
I am talking of course, about Iraq.
Where murder is a daily fact of life, and where the madman is not a sick Korean kid, but a cadre of suit-wearing psychopaths.
Thirty-odd people murdered in Blacksburg Virginia today, and the country is in mass mourning.
The President is shattered, the media people are unnerved, school administrators, professors, and students, clergy, all of them shocked and distraught.
Even the most hardened cops, Feds and others, shaken by the sheer violence, gore, and loss.
But this makes for a relatively peaceful day in Iraq - when only 30 odd bodies are dragged away, the wounded in a desperate run to the closest emergency care.
This is a day at the beach in Baghdad, or Fallujah, or Ramadi, or Anbar province.
Every day is Blacksburg in Iraq. And much much worse.
Can you even begin to imagine a life when every day means bombs and corpses, scattered severed heads and limbs, multiple rapes, tortures and beatings ?
Every day.
Every.
Day.
Well, give it a thought.
We are paying for it.
And- We know who the perpetrators are, We know that they have killed and will kill again.
Yet, We are letting it go on.
Yet, We have stopped nothing, changed nothing.
Here are just 2 photos of our mass murders in Iraq. Just so we can admire the product of our complicity, our tax dollars, and the future tax dollars of generations of us yet to be born.
`
If this is OK with you, then do nothing.They are counting on it.
Read more!!
Wednesday, April 11, 2007
DRANT #224: IMUS- A PURE PRODUCT OF CORPORATE RACIST MALE-DOMINATED WHITE AMERICA AND ITS PIMP MEDIA
#1: The corporations who sponsor Imus--
Sprint, Ditech, Am Ex, Proctor and Gamble, Capital One, Cadillac, etc etc etc take a look at the list --
Imus Struggling to Retain Sway as a Franchise - New York Times
Whether Don Imus can use a meeting with the Rutgers women’s basketball team to save his career is unclear.
www.nytimes.com/2007/04/11/business/media/11imus.html?hp - Apr 11, 2007 -
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
#2: Then of course the media that has supported him, and STILL supports him- white male racist bastards -
What he said on the air was just more of what they all just yukked it up about over a few stiff ones after work:
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=3083
Media Advisory
Rallying Around Their Racist Friend
Before firing, pundits defended Imus
4/11/07
In the aftermath of the racial outburst that got talkshow host Don Imus' dropped from MSNBC--referring to the Rutgers women's basketball team as "nappy-headed hos"-- a Washington Post editorial (4/10/07) posed a question many critics have been asking for years: How do prestigious journalists defend their cozy relationship with a well-known bigot?
As the Post put it: "But those who bask in the glow of his radio show ought to consider whether they should continue doing so. After all, you're judged by the company you keep." Since discovering Imus' long record of bigotry, misogyny and homophobia is not difficult (Slate, 4/10/07), it's a question reporters should have been asking long ago—FAIR posed the very same question to NBC's Tim Russert six years ago, for example (Action Alert, 3/1/00).
When journalist Phil Nobile (TomPaine.com, 6/28/01) presented many top pundits with evidence of Imus' bigotry, few (of the white ones, anyway) seemed to think what Imus was saying should affect their decisions to appear on his program. Nobile noted that Washington Post reporter Howard Kurtz wrote in his 1996 book Hot Air that "Imus's sexist, homophobic and politically incorrect routines echo what many journalists joke about in private."
Really? Do Washington journalists really call people "thieving Jews"--and then make mock apologies, saying that the phrase is "redundant" (Imus in the Morning, 12/15/04)? Did they really call Clinton's attorney general "old Bigfoot shaky Janet Reno," taunting her for her Parkinson's disease (Imus in the Morning, 6/12/01)? Do they really laugh uproariously at the news of hundreds of Haitians drowning (Imus in the Morning, 3/20-24/00)? If so, Kurtz has been sitting on a great many scoops.
Whatever their private conversations, many pundits are now being forced to answer questions about their associations with Imus, and those answers are worth documenting. Appearing on the Imus in the Morning show on April 9, Newsweek's Howard Fineman explained:
You know, it's a different time, Imus. You know, it's different than it was even a few years ago, politically.... And some of the stuff that you used to do, you probably can't do anymore.... You just can't. Because the times have changed. I mean, just looking specifically at the African-American situation. I mean, hello, Barack Obama's got twice the number of contributors as anybody else in the race.... I mean, you know, things have changed. And the kind of—some of the kind of humor that you used to do you can't do anymore. And that's just the way it is.
Fineman's suggestion, clearly, is that Imus' brand of racism was acceptable not too long ago— at least before Barack Obama was able to raise significant campaign donations.
On PBS's NewsHour With Jim Lehrer (4/9/07), Boston Globe columnist Tom Oliphant rejected the notion that appearing with Imus gave some form of cover to his bigotry:
I don't consider myself an enabler. But I recognize--and one reason I feel that it's possible to be this tough on him is that I think he understands that those of us from politics and public affairs and whatever who work with him are going to be seen as enabling. And if that's the case, then his conduct is of interest to me as much as it is to you.
Those words stand in contrast with what Oliphant said on Imus' show that very morning:
The train went off the tracks, which, you know, can happen to anybody. And, of course, what counts when the train goes off the tracks is what you then do.... Those of us... who know better, have a moral obligation to stand up and say to you, "Solidarity forever, pal."
That's not enabling?
Other media defenders point out that Imus does charity work, as if this gives him more room to be a racist. As USA Today's Peter Johnson noted (4/10/07), "His politically incorrect satire has been tempered by an intellectual and considerate side: He runs a camp for sick kids, cares about politics and has an eye for books that can catapult them onto the best-seller list." (As the Wall Street Journal has pointed out—3/24/05—Imus' ranch spends $3,000 a night to host each child; other organizations that do similar work spend about one-tenth as much.)
Appearing on the CBS Early Show (4/10/07), CNN host Lou Dobbs said much the same. While calling Imus' remarks "inexcusable," Dobbs went to offer what sounded very much like an excuse:
These calls for his resignation, frankly, in my opinion, this is a man you have to take into account. He does more public service, works with kids, he is an absolutely exemplary person in terms of his humanitarianism. And those who suggest you can't take into account the broader man for these, as I say, ignorant and inexcusable remarks, I don't think is adequate.
NBC reporter David Gregory (MSNBC, 4/9/07) stressed that "Imus is a good man," and that "this is a difficult time, not just because of the hurt that he has inflicted and what he said, as he tries to deal with it, but for all of us who are on the program and certainly don't want to be associated with this kind of thing that he's done, as all of this plays out." Gregory apparently wasn't so bothered with his association with Imus before this latest controversy.
Others made it seem as if deciding not to appear on the Imus show would be a problem. Newsweek editor Evan Thomas told the New York Times (4/9/07), "He should not have said what he said, obviously. I am going on the show, though. I think if I didn't, it would be posturing." To which the Charlotte Observer editorialized (4/10/07), "Which raises this question for Mr. Thomas: What posture would that be--upright?"
In a Los Angeles Times report (4/11/07), some Imus guests appeared to have second thoughts about their silence. CBS reporter Jeff Greenfield said, "That's something people like me should have challenged him on." (Greenfield, to his partial credit, did try to raise the issue when he interviewed Imus on Larry King Live--2/24/00.)
Others, meanwhile, seem to think Imus really means it when he says he's sorry. CBS host Bob Schieffer condemned Imus' remarks, but "said he would probably go on Imus' show again, noting that they had been friends for 15 years." The Times quoted Schieffer: "There's probably a good lesson for all of us in this. We all need to refocus and be sensitive to these things. Maybe sometimes he's gone too far and some of us really haven't been paying attention." Newsweek editor Jon Meacham (Washington Post, 4/11/07) said: "We don't want to rush to judgment.... Imus appears genuine about changing the tone, but if there's any backsliding, then it's over as far as we're concerned."
Pundits making such assessments might consider that this was not the first time Imus has appeared to sound contrite about his words, so it's hard to know why to believe him this time around. In a recent Vanity Fair profile (2/06), Imus said: "I regret the times I've been mean to people.… It's fine to pick on people who can defend themselves and deserve it. Some people don't deserve to be picked on who I picked on, so I don't do it anymore."
He made a similar pledge on his show years earlier (3/4/00):
There's no reason to hurt people's feelings. In some cases I have, and I'm not going to do it anymore. I get accused of being a racist all the time, but I'm not. I realize that we do things here that are misconstrued and frankly I regret it. People have criticized me and they're right.
Given Imus' repeatedly violated vows to rein in his racist schtick, one has to look to his pundit friends—his enablers—to show more resolve. Unfortunately, given their co-dependent relationship with the talk host, such resolve is unlikely. As Newsweek's Fineman put it (Imus in the Morning, 4/9/07): "You know, all of us who do your show, you know, we're part of the gang. And we rely on you the way you rely on us."
Click here to subscribe!
back in print by popular demand
FAIR's book-length debunking of one of talk radio's most notorious figures. A timeless classic. 128 pages.
Phyllis Bennis on Iran & British captives, Dean Baker on trade coverage (4/6/07-4/12/07)
Feel free to respond to FAIR ( fair@fair.org ). We can't reply to everything, but we will look at each message. We especially appreciate documented examples of media bias or censorship. And please send copies of your correspondence with media outlets, including any responses, to fair@fair.org
Read more!!
Sprint, Ditech, Am Ex, Proctor and Gamble, Capital One, Cadillac, etc etc etc take a look at the list --
Imus Struggling to Retain Sway as a Franchise - New York Times
Whether Don Imus can use a meeting with the Rutgers women’s basketball team to save his career is unclear.
www.nytimes.com/2007/04/11/business/media/11imus.html?hp - Apr 11, 2007 -
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
#2: Then of course the media that has supported him, and STILL supports him- white male racist bastards -
What he said on the air was just more of what they all just yukked it up about over a few stiff ones after work:
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=3083
Media Advisory
Rallying Around Their Racist Friend
Before firing, pundits defended Imus
4/11/07
In the aftermath of the racial outburst that got talkshow host Don Imus' dropped from MSNBC--referring to the Rutgers women's basketball team as "nappy-headed hos"-- a Washington Post editorial (4/10/07) posed a question many critics have been asking for years: How do prestigious journalists defend their cozy relationship with a well-known bigot?
As the Post put it: "But those who bask in the glow of his radio show ought to consider whether they should continue doing so. After all, you're judged by the company you keep." Since discovering Imus' long record of bigotry, misogyny and homophobia is not difficult (Slate, 4/10/07), it's a question reporters should have been asking long ago—FAIR posed the very same question to NBC's Tim Russert six years ago, for example (Action Alert, 3/1/00).
When journalist Phil Nobile (TomPaine.com, 6/28/01) presented many top pundits with evidence of Imus' bigotry, few (of the white ones, anyway) seemed to think what Imus was saying should affect their decisions to appear on his program. Nobile noted that Washington Post reporter Howard Kurtz wrote in his 1996 book Hot Air that "Imus's sexist, homophobic and politically incorrect routines echo what many journalists joke about in private."
Really? Do Washington journalists really call people "thieving Jews"--and then make mock apologies, saying that the phrase is "redundant" (Imus in the Morning, 12/15/04)? Did they really call Clinton's attorney general "old Bigfoot shaky Janet Reno," taunting her for her Parkinson's disease (Imus in the Morning, 6/12/01)? Do they really laugh uproariously at the news of hundreds of Haitians drowning (Imus in the Morning, 3/20-24/00)? If so, Kurtz has been sitting on a great many scoops.
Whatever their private conversations, many pundits are now being forced to answer questions about their associations with Imus, and those answers are worth documenting. Appearing on the Imus in the Morning show on April 9, Newsweek's Howard Fineman explained:
You know, it's a different time, Imus. You know, it's different than it was even a few years ago, politically.... And some of the stuff that you used to do, you probably can't do anymore.... You just can't. Because the times have changed. I mean, just looking specifically at the African-American situation. I mean, hello, Barack Obama's got twice the number of contributors as anybody else in the race.... I mean, you know, things have changed. And the kind of—some of the kind of humor that you used to do you can't do anymore. And that's just the way it is.
Fineman's suggestion, clearly, is that Imus' brand of racism was acceptable not too long ago— at least before Barack Obama was able to raise significant campaign donations.
On PBS's NewsHour With Jim Lehrer (4/9/07), Boston Globe columnist Tom Oliphant rejected the notion that appearing with Imus gave some form of cover to his bigotry:
I don't consider myself an enabler. But I recognize--and one reason I feel that it's possible to be this tough on him is that I think he understands that those of us from politics and public affairs and whatever who work with him are going to be seen as enabling. And if that's the case, then his conduct is of interest to me as much as it is to you.
Those words stand in contrast with what Oliphant said on Imus' show that very morning:
The train went off the tracks, which, you know, can happen to anybody. And, of course, what counts when the train goes off the tracks is what you then do.... Those of us... who know better, have a moral obligation to stand up and say to you, "Solidarity forever, pal."
That's not enabling?
Other media defenders point out that Imus does charity work, as if this gives him more room to be a racist. As USA Today's Peter Johnson noted (4/10/07), "His politically incorrect satire has been tempered by an intellectual and considerate side: He runs a camp for sick kids, cares about politics and has an eye for books that can catapult them onto the best-seller list." (As the Wall Street Journal has pointed out—3/24/05—Imus' ranch spends $3,000 a night to host each child; other organizations that do similar work spend about one-tenth as much.)
Appearing on the CBS Early Show (4/10/07), CNN host Lou Dobbs said much the same. While calling Imus' remarks "inexcusable," Dobbs went to offer what sounded very much like an excuse:
These calls for his resignation, frankly, in my opinion, this is a man you have to take into account. He does more public service, works with kids, he is an absolutely exemplary person in terms of his humanitarianism. And those who suggest you can't take into account the broader man for these, as I say, ignorant and inexcusable remarks, I don't think is adequate.
NBC reporter David Gregory (MSNBC, 4/9/07) stressed that "Imus is a good man," and that "this is a difficult time, not just because of the hurt that he has inflicted and what he said, as he tries to deal with it, but for all of us who are on the program and certainly don't want to be associated with this kind of thing that he's done, as all of this plays out." Gregory apparently wasn't so bothered with his association with Imus before this latest controversy.
Others made it seem as if deciding not to appear on the Imus show would be a problem. Newsweek editor Evan Thomas told the New York Times (4/9/07), "He should not have said what he said, obviously. I am going on the show, though. I think if I didn't, it would be posturing." To which the Charlotte Observer editorialized (4/10/07), "Which raises this question for Mr. Thomas: What posture would that be--upright?"
In a Los Angeles Times report (4/11/07), some Imus guests appeared to have second thoughts about their silence. CBS reporter Jeff Greenfield said, "That's something people like me should have challenged him on." (Greenfield, to his partial credit, did try to raise the issue when he interviewed Imus on Larry King Live--2/24/00.)
Others, meanwhile, seem to think Imus really means it when he says he's sorry. CBS host Bob Schieffer condemned Imus' remarks, but "said he would probably go on Imus' show again, noting that they had been friends for 15 years." The Times quoted Schieffer: "There's probably a good lesson for all of us in this. We all need to refocus and be sensitive to these things. Maybe sometimes he's gone too far and some of us really haven't been paying attention." Newsweek editor Jon Meacham (Washington Post, 4/11/07) said: "We don't want to rush to judgment.... Imus appears genuine about changing the tone, but if there's any backsliding, then it's over as far as we're concerned."
Pundits making such assessments might consider that this was not the first time Imus has appeared to sound contrite about his words, so it's hard to know why to believe him this time around. In a recent Vanity Fair profile (2/06), Imus said: "I regret the times I've been mean to people.… It's fine to pick on people who can defend themselves and deserve it. Some people don't deserve to be picked on who I picked on, so I don't do it anymore."
He made a similar pledge on his show years earlier (3/4/00):
There's no reason to hurt people's feelings. In some cases I have, and I'm not going to do it anymore. I get accused of being a racist all the time, but I'm not. I realize that we do things here that are misconstrued and frankly I regret it. People have criticized me and they're right.
Given Imus' repeatedly violated vows to rein in his racist schtick, one has to look to his pundit friends—his enablers—to show more resolve. Unfortunately, given their co-dependent relationship with the talk host, such resolve is unlikely. As Newsweek's Fineman put it (Imus in the Morning, 4/9/07): "You know, all of us who do your show, you know, we're part of the gang. And we rely on you the way you rely on us."
Click here to subscribe!
back in print by popular demand
FAIR's book-length debunking of one of talk radio's most notorious figures. A timeless classic. 128 pages.
Phyllis Bennis on Iran & British captives, Dean Baker on trade coverage (4/6/07-4/12/07)
Feel free to respond to FAIR ( fair@fair.org ). We can't reply to everything, but we will look at each message. We especially appreciate documented examples of media bias or censorship. And please send copies of your correspondence with media outlets, including any responses, to fair@fair.org
Read more!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
