The issue is that there is a double standard that Jackson and Sharpton hide behind when it suits them.
Jesse Jackson's - "Hymie Town", being unfaitful to his wife, perferring to tear others down, riding Dr. King's coat-tails. Jackson has muddied his own name!
Al Sharpton - defending Tawana Brawley, not apogizing to the policeman he dragged through the mud or for not reimbursing the taxpayers for misuse of the judicial system.
Louis Farrakhan - makes no bones about his hate for Jews and, I think for me too. I'd be afraid to be in the same room with him.
The double standard they impose on society perpetuates hatred.
They want reparations for slavery - Why? who's alive today that was a slave master or a slave? Most Americans cannot even trace their roots to this country during that era. Why should my tax dollars pay for such silliness?
Can't they find something constructive to do?
And as "reverands" haven't they heard the one about glass houses?
2007-04-13 01:33:07 · 5 answers · asked by ? 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Attacking Sharpton and Jackson does not make Imus’ statements any less reprehensible. Also, they didn’t fire Imus. NBC and CBS didn’t want to lose advertisers. If you are so concerned about hypocrisy, maybe you should start by analyzing your own.
2007-04-20 01:02:05 · answer #1 · answered by tribeca_belle 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You raise some very good and very important points. Being a Brit I cannot fully comment on all of the exact circumstances you mention, (such as Tawana Brawley, I had a look on Google and now have a rough idea). I think that the issue of race is part of a much much bigger picture. A certain section of society nowadays, (certainly in the UK and seemingly in the US from what I have read) seem to think that the world owes them a favour, with as little work as possible needed on their part, and for some people this certainly does involve playing the race card. I have never been too keen on Jackson, I can't explain exactly why, but I always had some respect for Sharpton, again I'm not sure why but I will have to find out some more now.
As for Farrakhan, it seems that the questioner and myself feel much the same.
2007-04-20 20:33:09 · answer #2 · answered by mr_sinister 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't think that its wrong at all. Im sick of celebs who get mad because they say something f'ed up and then declarie there 1st amendment rights. Heres the thing, yes they do have the right to say whatever they want, but they better be ready to face the music when the backlash comes. Its just like the Dixie Chicks. They talked crap about Bush, and then bitched that no one should be mad about it. Well, most of the people buying there records are most likely Bush supporters, so WTF? They make millons of dollars and are in the public eye and they exspect everyone to agree with everything they say, its such crap. The fact of the matter is, if you are famous or want to be famous, get ready for everything you say to be put under a microscope. That's the price of fame and fortune and I personally don't think its a big price to pay at all. I would agree with your question that this is hypocritical, but don't pander to these celebs who think that can say whatever they want, they make millons and are loved by millons, don't feel sorry for them. Would you say the things that Don Imus said? Hell no you wouldn't! So why should he get to say whatever he wants a get away with it.
2007-04-21 04:40:59 · answer #3 · answered by tigerpower 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
what i want everyone to do is close there eye's and just imagine if all them rutgers players were white,and al sharpton or jesse were calling the shots and they called them nappy headed hos,would they be racist,should they be fired.
2007-04-20 09:27:29 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is very hypocritical but they can get away with it because they just call anyone who disagrees with them a racist.
2007-04-13 10:59:33 · answer #5 · answered by gerafalop 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋