9.20.12 - Why is it so important for me to be specifically defined as “liberal” or “conservative?” The past two nights on “The Scoot Show” I have been reminded how some listeners feel the need to “define” the talk show host they are listening to in terms of political affiliation only. Why?
One of the big news topics the past few days has been Romney’s comment that 47% of Americans don’t pay income taxes and consider themselves victims that are entitled to government support. In my opinion, Romney made a mistake by saying that, and I have been called by some a “closet liberal” or a “liberal,” as if that’s a bad word. They’re trying to label me as member of the “liberal media.” Yet, there were prominent conservative voices who agreed with me.
Anyone who listens to the show at night on WWL-AM-FM or WWL.com knows I have strong convictions and I am never shy about expressing opinions that are not always popular. If you know anything about me throughout my career, you know that if in my heart and mind I really thought I was a “liberal,” I would proudly declare it on the air!
The truth is, like many, many Americans, I’m not so superficially defined! I’m not one-dimensional, and I don’t want to be a member of either club. I take on each issue, not from a political perspective, but from a perspective created by the challenges I’ve faced in my life.
Why are so many people afraid of those they cannot specifically define politically? Are they insecure? I rail against hypocrisy and in doing so I refuse to submit, and I mean submit, to being what’s defined as a “true” conservative or liberal. In reality, I represent most Americans.
In doing the talk show every night, I’ve noticed something that is disturbing. When I criticize President Obama, liberals react, but not with the vicious hatred that I hear from conservatives when I criticize Romney or a Republican. I am bi-partisan when it comes to criticism AND praise.
Why is the criticism from the right so hateful? Isn’t this America? Don’t Republicans stand strongly on the grounds of free speech? I fail to understand the hysteria that emanates from some people who believe the only right you have is to agree with their opinion.
It’s time for a change.
9.18/12 - In this part of the country, very recent history reminds us that we don’t always brace for the worst when it comes to storms. Following Isaac, it became obvious that many people simply did not take a CAT 1 storm seriously, because we’ve all been through those storms before with few problems.
One thing learned from Isaac…don’t just say it, but actually “expect the worst.” As Isaac approached, Entergy assured us all that they were ready to go into action right away and restore power within a short period of time. And we believed them. Well, expectations were too high.
As the Saints were hit with severe consequences for something that became known as “bounty-gate,” the Saints assured us they were a team that has faced challenges and they would unite as a team following the effects of a storm named “Goodell.” And, we believed them. Let’s admit our expectations were too high. The Saints will bounce back, but fan expectation was too high.
Regardless of what Entergy or the Saints told us about facing the challenges of a storm, we should have been smart enough and used life experiences to understand that Isaac and Goodell were storms - and storms cause damage that is sometimes greater than anticipated.
The lesson for Entergy and the Saints is to “under promise and over deliver,” rather than the other way around.
ROMNEY: Speaking to wealthy contributors at a “private” fundraiser, Mitt Romney said 47% of the country does not pay taxes and it’s not his job to worry about getting the vote of “those people.” Romney was attempting to appease the conservative base that rails against
“entitlements.” But, since that 46% that doesn’t pay taxes includes some elderly conservatives and other conservative Republicans who are NOT trying to take advantage of the government, Romney made a huge mistake.
The other problem is that the comment enhances the very image of being rich and out-of-touch that Romney is trying to change. And his attempt to clarify the comment seemed stiff and lacked sincerity. Is this the real Romney? Only he can change that perception.
With today’s technology, EVERYONE can be videotaped or recorded anywhere. Romney got caught with his top off in public!
AND, so did Kate! Today a French court ruled in favor of the Royal Family and demanded that a French magazine stop printing photos of Kate topless, and to turn the photos over to authorities. Really? The fine for publishing more of the topless photos is about $12,000. I’m sure the financial gain from publishing the photos again would be far greater than the fine, and in the past, negatives of photos could be turned over and case closed. Today, how could a publication turn all images over to authorities?
I don’t think anyone should be critical of a young married wife going topless in the privacy of her vacation; however, when you are the wife of the Royal Couple, you should realize that there will always be the possibility of paparazzi invading your privacy.
I applaud the young Royal Couple for acting like “normal” people and I condemn the press for losing respect for the private time of celebrities. But, as long as people buy the magazines that exploit the private or embarrassing moments of celebrities, the market for those photos will remain strong.
Lessons learned: take every storm seriously. And there are devices for taking videos and photos everywhere! What are you doing right now?
