It seems to me that if a homeless, drunken bum lying in a gutter says you shouldn’t drink, the message isn’t diminished because he is a drunken, homeless bum.
Judges routinely sentence offenders to public service, which includes speaking out against that which they have been found guilty of. Is their message diminished because they are mandated to do so as part of their sentence? Is the message of those participating in the youth offender program called “Scared Straight” diminished because they have been convicted of numerous heinous crimes?
The answer is obviously a resounding no. So the question that begs an answer is why would Bill Cosby’s message to black families on priorities be diminished because someone came out of the woodwork to accuse him of impropriety? An accusation which District Attorney Bruce Castor found “insufficient credible and admissible evidence” upon which to even bring charges against Mr. Cosby.
Could the answer to my question be because Cosby’s message is the one that must never be uttered and /or expected of black families? Could it be because Bill Cosby called it exactly like it was? Cosby demanded personal accountability.
Some may argue that he at times has shown little or no personal restraint by putting himself in harm’s way. But the only thing known for certain about his alleged tryst is that both parties disagree on what happened, and that Cosby has a media empire plus a “bazillion” dollars with which to defend himself.
Improprieties, children out of wedlock, riot, mayhem, lies and murder certainly hasn’t diminished Jesse Jackson’s or Al Sharpton’s message of “blame President Bush and it’s because you’re black.”
How does one compare what Cosby was accused of to Jackson’s fathering a child out of wedlock and quite possibly using tax-exempt monies donated to his Citizen Education Fund to buy a $365,000 California home for his paramour? Not to mention hefty child support and $35,000 in severance pay.
Deroy Murdock, reporting on a Bill O’Reilly expose of Jackson, wrote that “CEF raised $2,077,219 in 1998 and $9,919,914 in 1999. Meanwhile it spent on $30,933 and $15,699 in education and research in those years respectively. CEF dedicated just 0.39 percent of its budget to its stated purpose.” (“Jesse Jackson’s Corporate Cash Cow” – Charitable Donations, Looksmart July 2001; see also “The O’Reilly Factor,” Feb. 1, 2001, Transcript No. 020101cb.256)
Yet the lecherous mumbler of rambling unintelligible iambics continues to be recognized by the ever-decreasing (as in importance) mainstream press.
Twanna Brawley, the Korean grocer boycott and Yankel Rosenbaum did not prevent Al Sharpton from running for president – nor did they prevent him from having a prominent role at the Democrat National Convention, nor did they prevent him from being sought out for his opinions of Election 2004, nor have they “diminished” his racial heterodoxy.
Yet the media breathlessly ponders ad nauseam: “Will Cosby’s sex outside of marriage allow him to continue speaking out?” To which I add – as he should – about the elephant in the middle of the room of black America that they (the media) refuse to acknowledge.
Black America has a problem, and it is one that will not go away nor much less be recognized until people like Cosby put it on the table.
The question the media should be asking is not will Bill Cosby’s message be received in light of this, but rather “Why haven’t we the press given as much ink and camera time to those like the Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson, who have been saying the same thing?”
It is disgustingly offensive on its face that the vaunted (sarcasm intended) mainstream press would bestow integrity and value upon those who preach that which imprisons from pulpits funded by and founded upon immiseration, yet question the moral worthiness of one who offers tangible solutions to the barren wastelands of hopelessness.