Honoring reporters who just can't handle the truth!
October 11, 2007
For reporting that is an embarrassment to the profession of journalism, and for being beholden to corporate paymasters rather than the citizens of America.
Michael Medved started out as a Yale Law school graduate and a Congressional staff aide to firebrand Democratic Congressman Ronald Dellums (now the mayor of Oakland). But somewhere between writing a couple of bestselling non-fiction books, being a scriptwriter, and then a movie critic, something went terribly wrong.
Medved became a wing nut. Not just any garden variety wing nut. This is a guy Rush Limbaugh had guest host for him on numerous occasions. In fact, the backers of the GOP media echo chamber thought Medved did such a good job substituting for Limbaugh, they gave him his own radio program.
Medved knows the talking points. He's an upscale version of Rush, having gone to Yale Law School and all. Now, he is reportedly syndicated on more than 200 radio stations, five days a week.
What kind of wing nut babble does a shill for the affluent GOP version of dittoheads dwell on?
Well, BuzzFlash reader Cathy of Saint Albans, Vermont, nominated Medved with this statement: "There is no doubt that Medved should be named BuzzFlash Media Putz of the Week for his six reasons that slavery wasn't so bad. It is amazing that it was even printed! What a putz!"
At the time we read Cathy's e-mail, we didn't know what she was talking about, so we did a net search and "Holy Strom Thurmond," we found a commentary Medved wrote for the conservative Web site townhall.com entitled: "Six inconvenient truths about the U.S. and slavery."
And what are these "inconvenient truths"? Medved argues that certain "apologists" are slandering America by making a big deal out of slavery. We kid you not.
Maybe if we just got to his 6th point, you'll get the picture: "THERE IS NO REASON TO BELIEVE THAT TODAY'S AFRICAN-AMERICANS WOULD BE BETTER OFF IF THEIR ANCESTORS HAD REMAINED BEHIND IN AFRICA."
Whoa! Where is Trent Lott when you need him?
How about point number 3: "THOUGH BRUTAL, SLAVERY WASN'T GENOCIDAL: LIVE SLAVES WERE VALUABLE, BUT DEAD CAPTIVES BROUGHT NO PROFIT." Medved then goes on to admit that "Historians agree that hundreds of thousands, and probably millions of slaves perished over the course of 300 years during the rigors of the 'Middle Passage' across the Atlantic Ocean. Estimates remain inevitably imprecise, but range as high as one third of the slave 'cargo' who perished from disease or overcrowding during transport from Africa."
But you see his point in defense of slave owners was that they didn't want any slaves to die, so it wasn't really their fault that millions did. Medved (and we're not making this up) writes, "as with their horses and cows, slave owners took pride and care in breeding as many new slaves as possible. Rather than eliminating the slave population, profit-oriented masters wanted to produce as many new, young slaves as they could."
Oh, my Gawd! We've been rendered speechless.
Medved admits that there were some bad things about slavery, but critics are just being too harsh on the whole institution, he argues in his "six points."
Since we began the BuzzFlash Media Putz of the Week, we have had to wade through the muck of the right-wing gutters. But the TownHall.com commentary by Medved is perhaps the most offensive, inexcusable, and incomprehensible thing that we have come across.
It is beyond shameful.
Michael Medved, you deserve more than being named the BuzzFlash Media Putz of the Week. How about 50 lashes in a 90-degree sun and then having salt rubbed in your wounds?
Then we'll see what you think about slavery, you putz.