From: HF.GTD@forsythe.stanford.edu (Gabrielle Daniels)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.african.american
Subject: Re: Anyone know James Earl Jones' politics?
Date: 26 Jan 93 02:04:09 GMT
Article-I.D.: morrow.1k3uepINNlrc
Distribution: usa
Organization: Stanford University
NNTP-Posting-Host: morrow.stanford.edu

In article <C19K9D.6yt@NCoast.ORG>,
cmort@NCoast.ORG (Christopher Morton) writes about my comments
regarding god himself Rush-to-stupifying-judgment Limbaugh:
>>
>"Light"?   Do you mean "right", or something else?
.
You're reading too much into the sentence. I meant humorous.  The
opposite of heavy.

  I don't understand.  I
>don't think that either of us know what his real listenership demographics
>are.  He has had numerous Black callers, some of whom agreed with him and
>some who didn't.
.
They identified themselves as Afro-Ams?  Oh, well.  There is a
reactionary streak in some of us.  However, I stick to my figures
about Rush's fans.  99% white.  Oh, and Dan Rather is not liberal by
a long shot.  He's just a target.

>
>> .
>> .
>> Sorry.  It's too painful to listen to for more than 1 minute.  And
>> what liberal-oriented shows are you speaking of?  There aren't any!
>> McNeil-Lehrer?  The Laughlin Report?  Don't make laugh.
>>
>How did we get from radio call in shows to TV news?  I was referring to similar
>radio shows.
.
.
Rush is on TV.  So is McNeil-Lehrer, and on radio as well. We're
talking media here.
.
My credentials: B.A. in Radio-TV Journalism, San Jose State
University, 1976.

 Of course if you want to talk about liberal news media, you need
>only talk about Dan Rather, etc.
.
.
See above. And money don't make these guys liberals.

  I don't watch network news anymore.  I
>stick with CNN and NPR.  They're biased too, but they at least attempt to slap
>a veneer of professionalism on top.
.
.
During the Gulf War, I was patently disgusted with John Hockenberry
and Company's drumbeating coverage.  Cokie Roberts--ugh!  I switched
to Pacifica Radio's KPFA for the duration to hear my side.
Otherwise, I listen to NPR, read beyond the front page of the
papers, and try to hit all the news.  Once in a while, I flick on
David Brinkley and just to see what the idiots are talking about,
The Laughlin Report.
.
.
>> >I find that he makes some very good points while also sometimes doing the very
>> >things that he criticizes liberals for.  In general, I just find him better
>> >entertainment than I'm likely to find on the radio during the day.  No doubt
>> >there are people who take him too seriously, but then there are people who
>> >take "The Spotlight" and "The Daily World" seriously too.
>> .
>> Sorry, but this so-called fellow traveller doesn't read that shit.
>> Limbaugh's dangerous.  I've made my point.
>
>Dangerous how?  Because he says things that you disagree with?  Is Mort Sahl
>"dangerous" because he says things that *I* disagree with?  I don't think so
>and I've always thought that he was funny as hell in the bargain.
.
.
He's dangerous because he whips up people, whether he's trying to be
facetious, ironic or whatever.  Like Rosalyn Carter said of the
Reagans, and paraphrasing, he makes them comfortable in their
prejudices.  This is dangerous, not whether he's really a closet
liberal or a raving conservative.  He's right in with guys like
Father Coughlin.  Do you know who his handler is?  Roger Ailes, the
guy that gave us Bush and Willie Horton.  He produces the show.  And
I always watch to see who is behind who.
.
>I hope that you realize that the two publications that I cited above are at
>OPPOSITE ends of the political spectrum, which was my point.  I think that your
>final comment is reflective of the sort of intolerance and paranoia that
>infect both the hard left and hard right.
.
.
Your view of what is extreme left or right is subjective, to say the
least. What I don't tolerate is racism, sexism, homophobia by the
dominant culture. Remember, I said culture, not white race. And as
much disdain as MORs and rightwingers have for lefties, we're the
ones always on the line and the first ones to get jacked up.

  If Limbaugh is SO "dangerous", what
>do you propose be done to ameliorate the "danger"?  If Richard Prior or Ron
>Dellums are adjudged similarly "dangerous" by Jessie Helms, should similar
>action be taken to "fix" things?
.
.
Rush-to-specious-judgement has the freedom to say what he wants.
However, there is hardly anything in the media which forcefully
rebuts this kind of clack which I believe is useless to the citizens
of this country in trying to get along with each other and trying to
find some answers to what ails us.

  > >I'm sorry, the REAL danger
comes when people start getting labeled as >"dangerous".  Danger is
something to be ELIMINATED.  What will you do when >someone decides
that YOU are dangerous...?
.
.
This dude is raving, really. I know already I'm dangerous: I'm an
intellectual, four-eyed, feminist Afro-American woman.  I'm
dangerous when I open my mouth, and I am not even on TV.  At least,
not yet! 8^D