What Was Bryant Gumbel Thinking?
By Ed Phillips
(originally posted in February 2006)
Bryant Gumbel has been a has-been ever since NBC canned him from the Today Show (the official line is that he stepped down but lack of appeal has a predictable way of determining career paths in television). No longer able to land a regular gig in network television due to his smug superiority and general unlikableness, the former Today show co-host, apparently bitter over his career derailment into premium cable access, decided to inject a ridiculous race angle into the Winter Games, broadcast this year by his former employer. Was his motivation to gin up controversy and thus, interest in his show and earn some “street cred” by applying a racial pejorative to Republicans? It’s baffling because HBO subscribers have been watching his show for ten years. During a recent broadcast, he had this to say in his closing monologue:
“Finally, tonight, the Winter Games. Count me among those who
don’t like them and won’t watch them …
Ironically “don’t like it and won’t watch it” is also the most commonly polled description of the Today Show shortly before Gumbel’s departure.
Because they’re so trying, maybe over the next three weeks we should
try to…Like, try not to be incredulous when someone attempts to link these games to those of the ancient Greeks who never heard of skating or skiing.
The ancient Greeks also competed in the nude Bry. That alone explains their reluctance to skate, luge, or engage in any activity in which ice and sharp blades play a role, the unavailability of snow notwithstanding. Gumbel’s argument about linking the Winter Games with the ancient Greeks is a red herring…nobody makes serious direct comparisons. His real objection to the Winter Games is revealed in his next sentence.
So try not to laugh when someone says these are the World’s greatest athletes, despite a paucity of blacks that makes the Winter Games look like a GOP convention.
So, Bry couldn’t resist the black-athletes-are-superior-to-whites argument…who would have thought it? Of the countries participating in the Winter Games (primarily European, all of Scandinavia plus some Asian notables) only the US has a significant heterogeneous population in which athletes of African descent reside in appreciable numbers, as equals, alongside the majority population. Name another non-African or non-Caribbean country with more than a handful of black winter or summer athletes. Unless Gumbel is prepared to forcibly relocate thousands of black families to countries where there is snow and make them to take up skating and hockey, where’s his beef with a mostly white contingent of Winter athletes? Is it his insinuation that non-whites aren’t welcome in these countries? Clearly they are! One need only look at the current political trouble in France, Holland, Denmark and elsewhere to see that these Winter Games powerhouses have an open-arms policy toward people of color…can they help it if blacks don’t want to live there? The GOP joke is just too tired to comment on. He continued:
Try not to point out that something’s not really a sport if a pseudo-athlete waits in what’s called a kiss-and-cry area, while some panel of subjective judges decides who won…
OK, Bryant’s a guy (a high-maintenance, metro-sexual from what I can tell but a guy none the less) so I get the whole skating-is-an-art-not-a-sport thing. I don’t agree but I get it. He also offers the purists argument, that unless there’s an objective score earned solely by the competitors, it’s not valid competition to determine winners and losers. As I live and breathe, his is a well thought out argument based on logic and reason, all too rare among liberals like Gumbel. He finished with this:
So if only to hasten the arrival of the day they’re done, when we can move on to March Madness---for God’s sake, let the games begin.”
Evidently, Gumbel’s viewing preference is for sports in which there are a disproportionate number of blacks to whites (NFL, NBA, NCAA, Summer Olympics, etc). That’s great, but I suspect that if speed skating or ski jumping teams ever develop significant black representation, Gumbel would develop an interest in those sports as well.
No where, more so than in Olympic sports, is there equal opportunity for individual, achievement and success. Gumbel seems to be fixated on significant minority representation, regardless of that minority’s lack of desire to represent. His lament about the scarcity of black athletes in the Winter Games serves to illustrate his racist notion that if blacks choose not to participate, then it’s not a real sport, since, in his mind, everybody knows blacks are better athletes than whites. Bryant Gumbel might do well to rethink his position on race and sports in general. While he is free to prefer sports with large minority representation, viewers are free to prefer talk show hosts with less offensive opinions. To be certain, speech is free, but that is not to say it doesn’t come with a price.
Thursday, April 13, 2006
Immigration:
Jobs Americans Won’t Do, Or Cannot Afford to Do?
The United States has a long and storied tradition of welcoming, from all corners of the globe, immigrants seeking economic opportunity and the many freedoms this country offers. The resulting cultural and ethnic diversity gives richness, depth and balance to the social landscape. The U.S. issues citizenship documents to approximately 1 million immigrants each year (number not updated to include Angelina Jolie’s adoptees). In addition, an estimated 700,000 manage to cross the border illegally. That people by the hundreds of thousands risk their lives to get here each year is a testament to the powerful lure of liberty and the possibility of prosperity. Troublingly, those hundreds of thousands of new illegal residents pose many difficult questions, both economic and moral, that our society is only now seriously considering. Wage depression, government resource consumption, border security, and failure to assimilate are just a few of the issues, raised by the existence of a large population of mostly off-the-books residents, which we must address in the very near future.
Since 9/11, the issue of illegal immigration has garnered much attention because of the ease with which a potential Middle-Eastern terrorist could sneak across the southern border, hidden among the thousands of other dark-complexioned runners, jumpers and swimmers. So far, dedicated intelligence officials are batting .1000 when it comes to domestic terror prevention since 9/11. Let’s hope that streak continues despite Liberal’s attempts to weaken national security by attacking the very practices, such as the NSA wiretapping program, that are responsible for that prevention.
Setting aside the national security issue for now: in addition to the usual assimilation and taxation issues that are raised by the influx of illegals, George Bush’s, and the Republican’s, favorite mantra is that illegals are doing jobs Americans don’t want. This reasoning is more tortured than a prisoner at Abu-Ghraib. It is what President Bush would refer to as a bit of political “trickeration”. This argument, used by Democrats as well, just not as loudly, intentionally misleads the average voter to assume that Americans will not pick lettuce, clean hotel rooms, or work construction under any circumstances, and so why not make it legitimate for the aliens do it? To make this argument is saying that Americans think they are too good to perform certain jobs. That point may be true for some, but for the majority of job seeking Americans, it is patently false and intellectually dishonest, and the ones who advance the point know it is. The problem is not that Americans don’t want these jobs; it’s that illegals are doing these jobs at wages Americans don’t want. For Bush, admitting that this is really an artificial-wage-depression issue rather than a snooty-American career choice issue, would be admitting that illegal immigration, in terms of jobs and wages, directly hurts Americans: something he has been reluctant to do. Disingenuous politicians from both parties are lobbied heavily by businesses that employ cheap, illegal workers. Employers of illegals love the status quo since they don’t have to fund health insurance, social security taxes, nor adhere to minimum wage guidelines. (Don’t get me wrong; I’m not a proponent of the minimum wage. As a political tool, it is a class-warfare, vote-buying scheme hatched in the fever swamps of Liberalism and is bad for America, but that’s for another essay) For better or worse, American employees have successfully negotiated over the years, a plethora of benefits that most employers offer as a matter of routine. Employers of aliens are not bound by this routine. For better or worse, American citizens also enjoy access to a broad range of entitlement programs and safety nets. Many Americans in communities with large alien populations have rightly calculated that it is more profitable to not work at all, than it is to work at low pay with few or no benefits. [It’s hard to blame them initially but over time, it’s easy to become lazy, feel entitled, and abdicate personal responsibility for one’s own life. There’s nothing shameful about accepting temporary assistance, but it comes with the expectation of effort toward self-improvement.]
It may be profitable for businesses to employ illegals, but doing so circumvents the free market. All things being equal, the free labor market, if allowed to work, would dictate a wage at which Americans would be willing to do literally any job. It is Economics 101. In a fair labor market, all the potential laborers are legal U.S. citizens. Businesses have to compete for the best employees by raising wages and offering benefits. Generally, workers will accept positions with the company that offers the most pay (assuming that pay is higher than what they could “earn” collecting government handouts. That’s another reason to limit taxpayer funded charity to the able bodied…it forces them to find work). It doesn’t matter if the job is filter-cleaner at the treatment plant, laundry-collector at the Home for the Frequently Incontinent, or fish-squeezer at Vladimir’s House of Caviar, there is a wage at which Americans will compete for that position. It may be higher than what the employer wants to pay, but that’s too bad.
Now, let’s throw into the fair market, countless illegal aliens who are willing to work for peanuts, don’t demand benefits, and on whose behalf employers don’t have to pay social security taxes. Suddenly, the going wage for fish-squeezer is one third of what it used to be and there are no benefits. The American can make more money, sitting on his couch and eating chip crumbs off his shirt while he collects various government checks in the mail. That’s a broken system no matter how you look at it.
When you have relatively few job candidates choosing from many positions, employers must bid the wages up, offering to pay more than the competition to entice the candidate to work for him. When there are many prospective employees and relatively few jobs, the candidates bid the wages down, each one offering to work for less than the previous one in order to get the job. That’s how the market works, and it’s fine as long as everything is legitimate and legal. The problem comes in when the competitive work force is composed mostly of people who are in the country illegally. Not only are they law-breakers in a nation of laws and should be deported, they help force Americans into unemployment by artificially lowering the wages for various otherwise higher paying, and thus coveted, jobs.
What is the answer? These people are already here and like it or not, are becoming enmeshed in the fabric of our society. Is it even possible to round up 12 million people and deport them? We don’t know who they are so how can we find them? We can’t just start rounding up Mexicans willy nilly and sorting them out; Liberals tell us that racial profiling is wrong.
Whatever the solution, the first thing, obviously, is close the southern border. Maybe an Israeli-style wall or impenetrable fence would do the trick. We must control our borders or everything else is just foolish, political, election-year posturing.
Jobs Americans Won’t Do, Or Cannot Afford to Do?
The United States has a long and storied tradition of welcoming, from all corners of the globe, immigrants seeking economic opportunity and the many freedoms this country offers. The resulting cultural and ethnic diversity gives richness, depth and balance to the social landscape. The U.S. issues citizenship documents to approximately 1 million immigrants each year (number not updated to include Angelina Jolie’s adoptees). In addition, an estimated 700,000 manage to cross the border illegally. That people by the hundreds of thousands risk their lives to get here each year is a testament to the powerful lure of liberty and the possibility of prosperity. Troublingly, those hundreds of thousands of new illegal residents pose many difficult questions, both economic and moral, that our society is only now seriously considering. Wage depression, government resource consumption, border security, and failure to assimilate are just a few of the issues, raised by the existence of a large population of mostly off-the-books residents, which we must address in the very near future.
Since 9/11, the issue of illegal immigration has garnered much attention because of the ease with which a potential Middle-Eastern terrorist could sneak across the southern border, hidden among the thousands of other dark-complexioned runners, jumpers and swimmers. So far, dedicated intelligence officials are batting .1000 when it comes to domestic terror prevention since 9/11. Let’s hope that streak continues despite Liberal’s attempts to weaken national security by attacking the very practices, such as the NSA wiretapping program, that are responsible for that prevention.
Setting aside the national security issue for now: in addition to the usual assimilation and taxation issues that are raised by the influx of illegals, George Bush’s, and the Republican’s, favorite mantra is that illegals are doing jobs Americans don’t want. This reasoning is more tortured than a prisoner at Abu-Ghraib. It is what President Bush would refer to as a bit of political “trickeration”. This argument, used by Democrats as well, just not as loudly, intentionally misleads the average voter to assume that Americans will not pick lettuce, clean hotel rooms, or work construction under any circumstances, and so why not make it legitimate for the aliens do it? To make this argument is saying that Americans think they are too good to perform certain jobs. That point may be true for some, but for the majority of job seeking Americans, it is patently false and intellectually dishonest, and the ones who advance the point know it is. The problem is not that Americans don’t want these jobs; it’s that illegals are doing these jobs at wages Americans don’t want. For Bush, admitting that this is really an artificial-wage-depression issue rather than a snooty-American career choice issue, would be admitting that illegal immigration, in terms of jobs and wages, directly hurts Americans: something he has been reluctant to do. Disingenuous politicians from both parties are lobbied heavily by businesses that employ cheap, illegal workers. Employers of illegals love the status quo since they don’t have to fund health insurance, social security taxes, nor adhere to minimum wage guidelines. (Don’t get me wrong; I’m not a proponent of the minimum wage. As a political tool, it is a class-warfare, vote-buying scheme hatched in the fever swamps of Liberalism and is bad for America, but that’s for another essay) For better or worse, American employees have successfully negotiated over the years, a plethora of benefits that most employers offer as a matter of routine. Employers of aliens are not bound by this routine. For better or worse, American citizens also enjoy access to a broad range of entitlement programs and safety nets. Many Americans in communities with large alien populations have rightly calculated that it is more profitable to not work at all, than it is to work at low pay with few or no benefits. [It’s hard to blame them initially but over time, it’s easy to become lazy, feel entitled, and abdicate personal responsibility for one’s own life. There’s nothing shameful about accepting temporary assistance, but it comes with the expectation of effort toward self-improvement.]
It may be profitable for businesses to employ illegals, but doing so circumvents the free market. All things being equal, the free labor market, if allowed to work, would dictate a wage at which Americans would be willing to do literally any job. It is Economics 101. In a fair labor market, all the potential laborers are legal U.S. citizens. Businesses have to compete for the best employees by raising wages and offering benefits. Generally, workers will accept positions with the company that offers the most pay (assuming that pay is higher than what they could “earn” collecting government handouts. That’s another reason to limit taxpayer funded charity to the able bodied…it forces them to find work). It doesn’t matter if the job is filter-cleaner at the treatment plant, laundry-collector at the Home for the Frequently Incontinent, or fish-squeezer at Vladimir’s House of Caviar, there is a wage at which Americans will compete for that position. It may be higher than what the employer wants to pay, but that’s too bad.
Now, let’s throw into the fair market, countless illegal aliens who are willing to work for peanuts, don’t demand benefits, and on whose behalf employers don’t have to pay social security taxes. Suddenly, the going wage for fish-squeezer is one third of what it used to be and there are no benefits. The American can make more money, sitting on his couch and eating chip crumbs off his shirt while he collects various government checks in the mail. That’s a broken system no matter how you look at it.
When you have relatively few job candidates choosing from many positions, employers must bid the wages up, offering to pay more than the competition to entice the candidate to work for him. When there are many prospective employees and relatively few jobs, the candidates bid the wages down, each one offering to work for less than the previous one in order to get the job. That’s how the market works, and it’s fine as long as everything is legitimate and legal. The problem comes in when the competitive work force is composed mostly of people who are in the country illegally. Not only are they law-breakers in a nation of laws and should be deported, they help force Americans into unemployment by artificially lowering the wages for various otherwise higher paying, and thus coveted, jobs.
What is the answer? These people are already here and like it or not, are becoming enmeshed in the fabric of our society. Is it even possible to round up 12 million people and deport them? We don’t know who they are so how can we find them? We can’t just start rounding up Mexicans willy nilly and sorting them out; Liberals tell us that racial profiling is wrong.
Whatever the solution, the first thing, obviously, is close the southern border. Maybe an Israeli-style wall or impenetrable fence would do the trick. We must control our borders or everything else is just foolish, political, election-year posturing.
Woman fined for putting make-up on at wheel
Woman fined for putting make-up on at wheel – Daily Mail, London
Donna Maddock, 22, from north Wales, was caught on police video putting on her make-up while driving at 32 miles per hour. She was pictured with both hands off the steering wheel while applying eye make-up.
You don’t say? An inexperienced driver applying eye make-up while operating with no hands, a 4,000-pound death box at speed. You never see that!
I don’t know the official stats, but I’ll wager that at least 3 out of every 4 traffic accidents are the result of distracted drivers doing something idiotic while driving. I’ve heard noise about legislation in the works that would outlaw cell phone use, eating, applying makeup, tuning the radio, anything really which might distract the driver. I don’t think man needs to make a law when nature’s law will take care of it. People who are incapable of judging what they can safely do while driving will naturally, over time eliminate themselves from the gene pool…hopefully before they have any stupid kids.
She said she wanted to look her best for a date with a man who has a girlfriend and a child.
Her stupidity has already been established, so why did the reporter feel it necessary to include details about the guy she was going to see? Even in a serious news story, our friends across the pond cannot resist injecting tabloid titillation, no matter how irrelevant, into almost all reports.
Donna Maddock, 22, from north Wales, was caught on police video putting on her make-up while driving at 32 miles per hour. She was pictured with both hands off the steering wheel while applying eye make-up.
You don’t say? An inexperienced driver applying eye make-up while operating with no hands, a 4,000-pound death box at speed. You never see that!
I don’t know the official stats, but I’ll wager that at least 3 out of every 4 traffic accidents are the result of distracted drivers doing something idiotic while driving. I’ve heard noise about legislation in the works that would outlaw cell phone use, eating, applying makeup, tuning the radio, anything really which might distract the driver. I don’t think man needs to make a law when nature’s law will take care of it. People who are incapable of judging what they can safely do while driving will naturally, over time eliminate themselves from the gene pool…hopefully before they have any stupid kids.
She said she wanted to look her best for a date with a man who has a girlfriend and a child.
Her stupidity has already been established, so why did the reporter feel it necessary to include details about the guy she was going to see? Even in a serious news story, our friends across the pond cannot resist injecting tabloid titillation, no matter how irrelevant, into almost all reports.
WEIRDO!
This guy has totally gone off the deep end! Renowned medical expert Tom Cruise once again disparaged the use of psychiatric drugs, this time attacking the drugs used to help people kick addiction.Said Tom,
"I've always found the 'if it makes me feel better, it's OK' rationale a little suspect. “I think it's appalling that people have to live a life of drug addiction when I have personally helped people get off drugs."
During the interview he claimed that he could defeat heroin addiction in three days using the Church of Scientology’s detox program.
It’s took me longer than three days to get over the total and complete waste of the 8 dollars I paid to see “Vanilla Sky”.
What annoys me most about Leftists (and there’s a lot to choose from) is the belief that personal choices don’t play a role in life circumstances. Certainly, people don’t have to live a life of drug addiction…they choose a life of drug addiction. Just once I would like to hear a Hollywood do-gooder acknowledge the role that personal responsibility plays in life outcomes. Ever notice how they always talk about people who have made bad decisions, and are suffering the consequences of those decisions, in the passive? It’s as if these people had nothing whatsoever to do with the situation they’re in. The drugs, poverty, crime, whatever, sought them out and targeted them for a lifetime of misery and addiction.
“The drugs just took over the dude's life…it’s not his fault.” Please...dude made a bad choice each and every time he took a drug. It's his own fault he's addicted. I wish him the best of luck kicking the habit but asking the Tomcat for help will probably end up being another bad choice.
Here’s my theory about Scientology: These self-indulgent, aging actors have experimented with just about everything there is searching for fulfillment. Eventually, like everybody else, they get around to trying religion. But regular old Christianity is too mundane, too strict, and way too Republican. So in order to maintain their coolness and liberal “street-cred”, they dabble in strange, cultish, quasi-religions like The Kabala, The Unitarian Church, and Scientology. It will surprise no one that none of these “religions” holds their practitioners to any standards of behavior or accountability…how convenient for the anything-goes lifestyles enjoyed by the idle, rich Hollywood crowd.
How ironic it is that Tom’s “drug of choice” is very precisely an “it makes me feel better” cult/religion.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)