Monday, February 26, 2007
Courtesy of the Save the Internet folks including former Seattle hotshot Rocket Magazine Publisher and present day media professor expert guy and boob tube talking head Robert McChesney.
Friday, February 23, 2007
Once there was a little city on Puget Sound named Seattle that had big ideas and wanted to be like other cities that also had big ideas too. It has heard about these other cities from books and from watching the magic light box that was real fun to watch because it had lots of pictures. It would show pictures of other cities building beautiful buildings and things like roads and little trains to carry everyone who lived in the city around so they wouldn’t have to use their cars. It seemed quite efficient and real nice.
The people that lived in these other cities would listen to the mayor and other leaders of their city who would tell them about all the good things that they were going to build for them in the city. It was only natural that these leaders should make these decisions since they had been chosen by the people to be their leaders. In fact the people expected them to do just that and trusted them to make all the big decisions.
These other cities prospered and people would like to live there because when the people set their mind to doing something, even if it was a big job and cost lots of money, everyone pitch in and helped out. They knew that it may cost a lot of money, but they figured that it was good for the city to build things that over the long run would benefit everybody, and make their city better and a neat place to live.
These other cities would have big events and invite people to come and to dance, and party, play sports and enjoy themselves and spend lots of money while they were there. People like to go there and have fun because the cities were so nice and everyone was very genuine and treated them really well.
But Seattle had a problem because everyone that lived there apparently hadn’t actually visited many other places and most of the city leaders just wanted to talk talk talk all day about what it would be like to be like the other cities. The inhabitants of Seattle were also penny pincher's at heart and known for being very cheap. They could never see that money they spent on their city would make it better to live in in the long run. The endlessly complained amongst themselves about having to pay taxes for things the city needed.
Because of this no one wanted to every spend any money and the leaders were really afraid to ask for money and that was also because there was a dragon that lived in the hills near Seattle called the Eyman who would come out of his cave every time he heard the people talking amongst themselves about spending money to fix things or buy things the city needed.
The Eyman would make lots of noise and roar and everyone would run for their lives and hide. When the coast was clear again everyone would be even more afraid to talk about spending money on anything at all or doing anything that improved the city.
The Eyman would just laugh at the Seattle people in his cave where he lived with his evil friend Dori. Dori had a big bull horn and he would yell insults at the people in the town from the mouth of the cave through the bull horn so that they could be heard all over. He would warn them that the Eyman would come down and eat them if they every started even thinking about spending money to fix anything in the town, even if it was old or needed fixing. So lots of things in the town like the roads and buildings and the big smoky buses that everyone was force to ride, if they didn’t have a car, started to fall apart.
There also happened to be a big huge concrete fence that someone long ago had build in front of the town and it was so high big and ugly that no one in Seattle had ever been able to get around or over it to see what was on the other side. There was a rumor in Seattle that there was a waterfront and an opening to the sea on the other side of the fence. But when people would talk about there being a waterfront or sea on the other side of the fence most people would just laugh and say it was crazy talk.
Some very brave people in Seattle even dared to talk about tearing down the big ugly fence because there may be a waterfront or a sea and other good things on the other side. But lots of people had gotten used to the fence because it had been there so long and they actually liked it.
"Boy if they tore down that big ugly fence lots of bad things would happen" they would say. "Plus Dori would come out of the Cave before we even took one stone away from the fence and yell at us through his bullhorn and eventually the Eyman would come and eat us up".So the fence just stayed there because most people were afraid to change things or didn't understand why it needed to be removed anyway.
But, mostly the leaders, were afraid of losing their nice jobs, or being eaten by the Eyman if they said anything about the situation. So they did very little to change peoples attitudes about building things, fixing things, or getting rid of the fence.
Oh, they would act interested but mostly they were only happy talking and talking and talking and going to fancy parties and gallery openings where everyone talk a lot about things like art. Which most Seattle people didn’t really know much about. But it made them feel important and cultured when they acted like they did.
The people would talk and talk and talk about whether it was a sin to like to watch sports or race cars racing around a track. They thought people who liked sports and things like race cars were not as smart as they were and they would laugh and them and then return to talking about art and what brand of coffee tasted the best or how nice the fence really was or they didn't know why anyone would like to get rid of such an object of civic pride as the big ugly fence.
It seemed they had a hard time having fun expect at the Norway festival that happened every summer in a section of town called Ballard. They would usually drink lots of strong drinks that made them feel light headed and want to throw up. When they felt better they would eat smelly fish which were a delicacy at the festival.
The leaders and the people who live in the town just ended up dreaming about what it would be like to live in those other nice modern cities as they just continued to talk talk talk about it and take votes on everything because the politicians were afraid they'd make the wrong decision all the time. They also liked to have lots of meetings where they invite the citizens to come in, especially poor street people who lived in Seattle, to give them advise on all important civic projects. Even though the street people didn't really care and just wanted to complain that their needs were not being met.
Things never really got done when all was said and done because of all the talking and meetings and the fear of spending money because of the Eyman and his friend Dori with the bull horn. In the end they remained a little city of small mined people who felt unhappy all the time and didn’t have much fun ever.
Monday, February 19, 2007
Dear Senator Murray,
Because you are one who plays a important roll in the support that veterans receive from their government I would like to ask you to do something about the recent revelations concerning the mistreatment of Iraq war veterans. As a Viet Nam Era military veteran, I am especially appalled by the latest news, which I find outrageous and therefore deserving of your immediate attention.
I'd like to refer you to the Washington Post's recent article about Walter Reed Hospital Building 18 residents just in case you have not seen it. I find the article difficult to read without being filled with anger towards those responsible for this debacle. But, this I am afraid is only the tip of the iceberg.
Further, I believe it is time for someone to shine a light on the fact that the Bush administration and the Republican congress talk endlessly about “supporting the troops” but in reality has cut billions in funding to agencies like the Veterans Administration. In the meantime injured and wounded soldiers must live in cockroach-infested conditions while timid Democrats say and do nothing substantive about it. The time for giving high minded speeches and posturing should be over.
If I were in your position I would personally inspect places like building 18 with a network camera crew in tow. Then call on Bush and Congress to live up to there promises to the Veteran. This I believe would also begin to show the American people the hypocrisy of the Republican rhetoric about undying support of veterans and what it actually translates to in the real world.
I have recently undergone cancer treatment at the VA hospital in Seattle. Medical treatment I could not of otherwise received or afforded if I had not been eligible due to my military service to this country. I'm one of the lucky ones. I can personally attest to the dedication and skill of the doctors and staff of this VA facility. But I can also understand the growing frustration they have voiced to me when the federal government cuts billions in funding, in a time of war, to their agency. No wonder there are long waiting lines and backlogs for those legitimately seeking care.
This is hypocrisy of the highest level. Veterans are treated like so much "cannon fodder" by their government and especially this administration. The truth is Bush has cut funding to the ones in need while billions of dollars go missing in Iraq because of the mishandling or the taxpayers money by private contractors and corrupt or incompetent government officials, who still end up lining their pockets with a substantial portion of the money whether they deliver a shoddy service or product or not.
But only a few of these vermin are really punished for such despicable breaches of the public trust or their blatant profiteering. Meanwhile the love ones of the veterans are left trying to rationalize what meaning to attach to the sacrifices made by the wounded, killed or psychologically damaged.
I fully support an approach like that introduced in legislation sponsored by Congressman Jack Murtha in the House where before Bush gets any money he requests to conduct his war he should first be required to allow for proper leave for soldiers (at least 12 months) before they can be returned to the war zone and/or they are assured that they are properly trained and equipped with the best equipment the country can provide before they go back into the fight.
Someone has to stand up to the Bush NOW. He must be stopped before he literally gets us all killed by some misguided terrorist who’s hatred of the United States is fueled by such a vision less and misguided American foreign policy and malfeasance at home and aboard in the operations of OUR military and government institutions.
Friday, February 16, 2007
- THE FRANK “LET’S TAKE A HEAD COUNT THEN DECIDE” CHOPP ELEVATED PEOPLE MOVER
- THE CHRISTINE “I’D LIKE A MERCEDES” GREGOiRE MEMORIAL ONE TERM PARKWAY
- THE NICK “POINTLESS” LICATA MAYBE THIS WILL ACTUALLY GET SOME ONE TO RUN AGAINST ME AT ELECTION TIME FREEWAY
- THE PETER “I’M EMBARRASSED” STEINBRUECK ELEVATED MEMORIAL CIVIC EMBARRASSMENT
- THE MAYOR GREG “TEAR DOWN THIS WALL” NICKELS AND REPLACE IT WITH THIS ONE BYPASS
- THE DOUG “I’M JUST TRYING TO KEEP MY JOB” MACDONALD WHAT DO YOU WANT THE REPORT TO SAY HIGHWAY
- THE MARTIN “LET THEM EAT CONCRETE” SELIG’S NO TUNNEL WHAT’S A WATERFRONT ANYWAY ALLIANCE BIG BOXY CONCRETE HIGHWAY
- THE HELEN “ELECTED FOR LIFE” SOMMERS MEMORIAL HIGHWAY FOR QUEEN ANNE’S ELDERLY
- THE ROB “NO NO” JOHNSON OF THE TRANSPORTATION CHOICES COALITION WE DON’T EVEN OWN A CAR EXPRESSWAY
- THE KATE “WHAT’S THE RUSH” JONCAS DOWNTOWN SEATTLE ASSOCIATION DRIVE
- THE LIBERAL BLOGGERS WE TALK A BIG GAME THROUGH WAY
- THE AIR HEAD ENVIRONMENTALISTS WHAT’S A CAR ROAD
- THE IT’S PRETTY UP HERE DRIVING ON THE VIADUCT SEATTLE PEOPLE ARCHITECTURALLY AND AESTHETICALLY IMPAIRED BOULEVARD
- THE SONICS OR OTHER FREELOADING PROFESSIONAL SPORTS TEAMS MEMORIAL TOLL ROAD
Tuesday, February 13, 2007
The decision today by the State DOT to endorse replacing the viaduct with a new and bigger god awful viaduct is final proof that the City of Seattle has lost it audacity and is being prepared for architecturally and environmental castration in short order. The decision was closely followed by reports that the Governor will now endorse the new elevated highway option in lock step with Speaker of the House Frank “get err done” Chopp who has been cooking the political books all along setting the tunnel and other more modern viaduct replacement options up for failure.
Add to this the announcement today that the Sonics are leaving for Renton after being pushed out by City Councilmen Nick Licata and other snobs who hate sport, and have always hated sport in this town and the handwriting in on the freaking wall.
These are the white collar nerds, political operatives and overly politically correct cheapskate scaredy-cats, weekly avant-garde newspaper snobs, white bread bourgeoisie bloggers who have slowly but surely brought what was once a audacious city to the brink. With their overly liberal, namby-pamby, narrow minded, penny pinching, gutless play is safe politics and sunny feel good bull shit. Their the never quite speak the truth phonies that out-of-towners talk about when that talk about those people in Seattle.
After the Seattle liberal sports hating crowd voted the Sonic out of town, by creating an atmosphere that would drive any major business players out, they will have to live with the Sonics in Renton, who probably will love to have them and the taxes, jobs and image, and the smarty-pants Seattleites still will have to pay the taxes to support them and drive on the new monstrosity waterfront blocking viaduct to get to the game. Stupid and shortsighted I would say.
Forty years and not one light rail car has carried a pay passenger or rolled out yet. Public transit here is probably the worst of any comparable city of its size anywhere. Anyone who has traveled to a major world city here or abroad feels impotent when they return here and find a city so lacking in ways to move people around as this city does. For God’s sake Tacoma already has their light rail up and running. But they don’t have the awful political “process” we have to deal with in Seattle. They elect people and those people make decisions. Not Seattle we talk and posture.
Yesterday Governor Gregoire was quoted as saying the following about the tunnel, "We need to be fiscally responsible to the taxpayer. I'd also prefer a Mercedes, but I can't afford that, either."
Well apparently she decided to give us a fucking used Yugo instead. Thanks Frank, Nick, and Christine for nothing.
The DOT today recommends against both tunnel options and called for the legislature to vote to build an even bigger elevated highway to replace the crumbling eyesore viaduct we have now.
This demonstrates a lack of leadership from the likes of Speaker of the House Frank Chopp and other key elected officials in Olympia.
It is even more important now that Seattle voters reject the elevate highway at any cost on their election ballots. Seattle needs to find a way to keep the funds previously allocated for viaduct replacement by the legislature. The City must aggressively seek additional means of finance to go forward with either a tunnel or opted out in favor of the surface transit option .
I sense a large political backlash down the road for these two if Seattle ends up with another elevated highway. Also for several members of the council who have bungled this badly. This will happen when Seattle residents finally awake from their slumber and realize that a catastrophic mistake has been made by rebuilding a elevated highway. If Gregoire loses a close rerun election to Dino Rossi I would bet the viaduct scandal will be what puts him over the top. Sad because she has been great on nearly all the other issues. But if she loses enough votes in Seattle over her screwing up viaduct replacement it may be her demise.
As for Chopp. He's gotten a little to big for his britches on this and other issues and worked as an obstructionist. Maybe the voter next time will realize he also needs to be knocked back into political place.
Yes, the Seattle City Council is guilty of not getting their shit together on one of the most important pieces of transportation policy to happen in their or our lifetimes. Their ability to lead on this issue should be addressed squarely at the time of next election cycle.
As much as most would like to bash Mayor Nickels on this, he is been pretty much the one constant person in power calling for the tunnel from the beginning.
Gov. Chris Gregoire said Monday that Seattle's upcoming vote on replacing the quake-damaged Alaskan Way Viaduct will be flawed and without credibility, but rejected GOP calls to shift billions of dollars in state financing to other mega-projects.
House Transportation Chairwoman Judy Clibborn, D-Mercer Island, said the March 13 advisory vote will be largely irrelevant as Olympia moves inexorably to approve a rebuild of the elevated highway along Seattle's downtown waterfront. That would cost about $2.8 billion, most already approved by the Legislature.
Seattle leaders prefer a tunnel, with a pricetag of $3.4 billion - a scaled-backed version of a $4.6 billion, six-lane tunnel the city had promoted until recently.
Gregoire acknowledged the passion of some Seattle leaders for the tunnel, but said, "We need to be fiscally responsible to the taxpayer. I'd also prefer a Mercedes, but I can't afford that, either."
Neither she nor Senate Transportation Chairwoman Mary Margaret Haugen, D-Camano Island, were willing to flatly declare the tunnel option dead, although many House Democrats have.
"I don't see the tunnel as an option," Clibborn said in an interview. "So the elevated proposal is all that is left. I didn't even have a hearing on the tunnel option."
Gregoire and key legislators said the revised tunnel plan hasn't been studied by experts enough to make sure the pricetag and other details are valid.
The governor was biting in her comments Monday about Seattle's handling of the vote, and said it's no wonder that some lawmakers are lusting after the billions in viaduct money to use on other projects.
"You know, I tried to warn Seattle," she told a news conference. "I tried to tell them while you're indecisive and rethinking and asking for extensions of time, the fact of the matter is that every legislator outside of Seattle is looking at that money and saying, `We're ready to spend it and not debate about it. Our projects are ready.'"
Monday, February 12, 2007
Saturday, February 10, 2007
This third choice has been referred to as the “surface transit option”. It does not mean that nothing would be done of course. To quote:
“The sad thing is, there is another option—an option that doesn't block the waterfront, doesn't include a giant trench through Belltown, and doesn't serve cars at the expense of the environment. It's the same solution that other cities around the country—from New York to San Francisco to freaking Chattanooga, Tennessee—have implemented, to literally universal success: Tear down the wall, improve surface-street connections downtown, and spend our tax dollars putting transit, not pouring concrete, in the Alaskan Way corridor.”Unfortunately, I feel that the surface transit option is not widely understood by the electorate. I would strongly lean in support of the surface transit option over building any viaduct ever period if those were the two choices.
But I also realize that the voters are probably not as up to speed on all the alternatives as they should be at this point in time. Most, according to the surveys seem to just want to blindly replace the viaduct with another new monstrosity elevated roadway. It maybe condescending to say that about such a large group of people, but time is short and I think we need to be realistic about the attention levels of the average voter on this subject.
Even key politicians in Olympia, namely the Speaker of the House Frank Chopp, who controls the agenda and financing to a major degree and the Governor, have thoughtlessly taken the expedient and easy political road calling for rebuilding some form of elevated viaduct. These are tough foes to overcome if Seattle is to do the right thing and stop the viaduct from being simply replaced with another piece of shit, environmental, aesthetic, and architectural disaster of an elevated roadway in any form.
So I offer the compromise. The Tunnel. This would require a Yes (tunnel) and No (elevated road) vote on the advisory ballot.
The main reason I offer this position is I believe that most voters, especially those who live or have business in West Seattle an South Seattle, cannot imagine not having a major highway available to them for their daily commute or commerce. Those of us who lived through the Nisqually earthquake of 2001 and had to work around not having a viaduct or having to rely on surface streets or I-5 remember what it was like. It was unadulterated gridlock hell getting anywhere. Having to commute without the viaduct must be a paramount memory to many who suffered through it. To offer them nothing but new imporved surface streets and transit is not enough. I'm afraid it just won't fly.
I will also argue we need for homeland security and reasons of commerce a major highway corridor to handle, for the next fifty years, the personal, business, metro bus and government vehicle traffic.
The surface transit option, although high minded, will not answer these real concerns. It is a noble goal to get everyone riding mass transit, biking or walking to work someday but unrealistic given the history of accomplishments here so far in that area. Mostly the idea of intercity intellectuals.
It also is a major sacrifice for vehicle commuters, who would be forced onto surface streets by construction for a number of years, to be willing to support a tunnel if they had no hope that a shinny new highway would be worth all the suffering in the end.
So no one in his or her right mind should be for an elevated viaduct type structure. The surface transit option is noble but not practical.
I have also argued in a previous post that funding for the project can and should be worked out no matter how much it ends up being based on what option we end up with be it tunnel on surface transit. This is due to the historical, colossal and the once in a life time decision nature of the undertaking.
It’s also time to say no to meddling by politicians who lack leadership or understanding in Olympia.
This is a once in a lifetime civic project that we must get right at any cost. Therefore, the tunnel, in some form, is the proper compromise.
I urge Seattle's citizens to vote Yes and No on their ballots.
Friday, February 09, 2007
Thursday, February 08, 2007
Presidential wannabe John McCain still doesn't get it.
Sen. McCain (R-Ariz.), a decorated Vietnam veteran and likely presidential candidate who supports the addition of troops, dismissed VoteVets.org as a "handful of veterans" not representative of the military.
VoteVets.org has 20,000 members, including 1,000 veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan, said spokesman Eric Schmeltzer. The PAC is part of a coalition of left-leaning groups organized by Americans United for Change that includes labor unions and liberal groups such as MoveOn.org.
When Iraq war veteran Jon Soltz accused Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) of "aiding the enemy," the Democratic senators gathered around him yesterday did not wince. Nor did Democrats object when Soltz, the chairman of a group called VoteVets.org, called President Bush and Vice President Cheney "draft dodgers."
Tuesday, February 06, 2007
In Today's Stranger SLOG Josh Feit had a short ditty about old people being the main supporters of rebuilding the viaduct rather then building a new waterfront tunnel in Seattle. The theory being that they were there when the present structure went up and would have a hard time processing the change.
Hey Josh, I'm sixty and I strongly support a tunnel.
Hello out there Seattle, wake up we're a freaking seaport! Were suppose to have a waterfront.
The citizens of Seattle will never support a tunnel because their too damm cheap and too damm narrow minded. Not to mention their apparent total lack of vision. They demonstrate it over and over again. i.e. no light rail system operational to date in this backward behind times uptight town. It's that Northwest Cubby and Tubby syndrome. Buy the cheapest product possible no matter if it's a massive highway system that's suppose to last 50 years or a pair of sneakers.
Seattle likes to think it's hot shit but it can get anything significant done. Too dependent on "process" and fear. Mostly impressed by the last person they talk too. We're lead by a bunch of play it safe politicians who rather take the leadership-less road to no where's ville.
For years the viaduct has blocked the city from its natural opening to the sea. Oh never mind any boost a tunnel would bring to the waterfront's environment and aesthetics, to tourism, to parks, to walking streets, to downtown and countless other reasons that any forward thinking person could easily imagine.
But we want to do it on the cheap. The additional money spent on a tunnel will be insignificant and meaningless in 20 years. Just how fucking often do you actually build such a massive civic project as this one anyway? Once in a lifetime? Shouldn't you do it right?
All major civic projects have cost overruns from the time of the Brooklyn Bridge to the Tacoma Narrows project today. So you find ways to make it work financially for the long term good of the city. This is how most "real" cities deal with these things. Not here. It constantly like two old hags fighting over the back yard fence. In most major cities leaders stick their necks out and personally see these type of thing get built by leading the way often risking being reelected. Here it's put up to the vote amongst the homeless who live under the viaduct after an endless number of studies and hearings.
But, the no tunnel parochial citizenship here in Seattle would rather listen to most of the gutless politicians who oppose the tunnel. Remaining a city with it's back to the sea, apparently forever.
When the new high rise viaduct is done and you bring your out of town relatives and friends in from the airport via the new roadway if they ask where the waterfront is tell them we don't have one here anymore.
These so call entertainers and other hacks on Imus show, tend to agree with his outlandish over the top statements and prognostications while most of the time it should be seen for what it is crack potted self-center banal behavior.
Instead those on the show demonstrate some perverted form of boyish hero worship, hanging on Imus's every word. Hoping for approval in what appears to be some sort of "macho alpha male of the pack who can kiss Imus ass best" contest.
To me Imus personality type appears to fit into the category of some sort of UNTREATED ego centric "white knuckling" former crack and "dry drunk" booze head bully boy and wannabe drugstore cowboy.
It's like he stopped using drugs and not much more. Never really dealing with the underlying insanity. I guess you can get away with this for years if you have enough money.
I must admit here, I don't know for a fact what sort of path of recovery Imus is walking, and truthfully it not really my business. But I've seen enough of this type to offer, for the sake of discourse about this very powerful entertainment personality, a educated guess.
The untreated are the ones where the loved ones around them often wish they still were breaking the furniture once in a while in a drug crazed episode, rather then having to deal with the insanity of them "sober". Remember abstaining from drugs and alcohol alone are not really considered sober. Sober is when you abstain and you have dealt with or are dealing with the underlying emotional issues. This type of approach to recovery usually creates some form of humility or recognition of where your place is in the world. It reduces self centered behaviors that are, many would agree in the recovery community, what led to the substance abuse in the first place.
It hard to label anyone's personality problems as precisely caused by this or that I'll admit. But I don't think it such a reach with Imus. He's pretty predictable.
Imus the ever grumpy curmudgeon megalomaniac whiner, that he is, appears most of the time as the loose cannon. While most of the other time publicly threatening anyone who's not doing "what Imus wants". Other times those who he perceives have failed him are being threatened with the full fury and wrath that his wealth and present position in society can bring to bear. Mostly. it seems, revolves around some degree of lost of access to him and to his show and personal name calling.
Whether it be directed at the doorman of his swank New York apartment building or the Governor of New Mexico. To mention only recent victims of this no one says no to Imus or gets in his way delusional playhouse that he loves to occupy.
A few days ago he went on a long degrading rant about Governor Bill Richards of New Mexico when the governor, instead of calling Imus himself, apparently had a his chief of staff call him about a permit Imus was seeking in New Mexico. Imus does not like to talk to just someone's chief of staff. God dammit I'm Don Imus the bully and king maker.
But are the executives at MSNBC being codependent and/or enabling for not speaking out when Imus goes overboard and makes wild and outlandishly hurtful and dangerous statements on his cable program. Maybe it time for a intervention at MSNBC?
Unfortunately those around him and over him seldom reign him in at all. Apparently the bully has become too rich and powerful to control. So he says whatever he wants no matter how idiotic, dishonest, crude, rude, stupid, dangerous or hurtful it maybe to others. Not to mention that his viewer ratings are some of the best on the network.
So we're not surprised network types are more then willing to turn a blind eye to the lack of fair play or a semblance of any journalistic integrity on the show when the almighty profits and ratings are involved. They pass it off as comedy or just the presently acceptable reality crap that we get nowadays when we switch on the radio or TV.
Also the rich and famous bow before him hoping for a crack at his large audience of unwashed knuckle-heads made up of the NASCAR crowd and the rest of us. "Imus in the Morning" listeners are apparently very amuses with his shtick most mornings. It must be the Paris Hilton Howard Stern syndrome of being beyond embarrassment of any kind while lacking real talent or intelligence so appealing to today's audiences.
Everyone has seen enough but we keep getting more crammed down our throat anyway. It also adds to the uncivilized nature of public discourse we find so popular today and that I must admit I have been guilty of nourishing at times in my blog and probably in this post.
If you wish to have a best selling book for instance, then you must crawl at the feet of Imus and be ready for some bullying and begging for airtime. To most authors nothing is apparently too degrading if it means getting on the show. Such is the reputation of Imus in the Morning when it comes to the making a best seller.
Don't get me wrong, most times I tolerate Imus outlandish ranting as entertaining, but lately he has begun to wear thin.
Especially when he suggest that we drop nuclear weapons on Tehran, Mecca, and Riyadh as some sort of end game solution to dealing with "the terrorists" as he did on his program this morning. It was in the context of not wanting his brat progeny to have to "fight the terrorist too, when he grows up".
Imus Producer Bernard McGuirk, who is the tough red neck New York Irish guy character on the show, recently also flippantly insinuates that Barack Obama middle name "Hussein" gave him some kind of "Jew hating name", which makes Obama a "Creep" and a "flip flopping weasel". The often racist remark making McGuirk should be made to at least offer a public explanation when he makes such remarks.
This type of behavior is more suited for a comedy network insult comic special, not MSNBC. Someday it may catch up with Imus in the Morning and the tide shall then turn against him. Then he will be relegated to the scrap heap of loud mouth shock jocks commentators who most people become wise to eventually and then begin to just change the channel.