January 7, 2010
Rushing for the Truth
I worked with Rush Limbaugh for a brief period of time back in the late eighties. Oh, he won’t remember me. At the time, I was a worker bee on a television crew for a Sacramento-based comedy show called, “TV Lite,” much as I’ve remained throughout my adult life, whether I toil with pen, lesson plans or a cranky washing machine. I am happily one of the middle-class masses, keeping it real.
So why am I utilizing a famous man’s name with whom I have a rather tenuous connection to begin a discourse? I’m singling him out as a symbol of a trend. Who am I to offer up my opinion, asides and pithy reasoning? I am you. I am the public who has grown not just weary, but disillusioned by many of our public figures’ lack of individual, let alone collective, consciences. I am spurred onto commentary by the wholesale media dismissal of celebrity transgressions, incensing me to my very core, specifically Rush Limbaugh’s use of drugs. Maybe his personal struggle wouldn’t be my business, if he wasn’t on the air, blasting out vituperative indictments that I’m forced to hear when some of the fine retail establishments I frequent dial in his show for public consumption. The fact of the matter is that if it was you or I in the same circumstances, not only would we not be on the air, but I suspect we would not be free either, incarcerated for breaking the law. It puts a new spin on Lady Justice being blindfolded for impartiality, but rather she is blindfolded in order to be shielded from the truth.
Should public figures be held accountable for their actions? I think we would all agree that they shouldn’t be held any less accountable than any of us and, speaking of accountability, isn’t there an intrinsic element of this when you accept the role of public figure? We’re not talking about perfection, mind you, we’re talking about individual honesty and accountability. This seems especially cogent if you’ve taken the tact of telling people how to navigate the road of morality, seemingly filled with righteous and, dare I say, right answers, blasting those who do not think as you do and then, in the same breath, utter a casual “mea culpa,” shrug, and walk away as a coward.
When I knew Rush, however casually, that was the one thing he wasn’t; a righteous coward who lacked humanity. You see, back when I knew Rush he was a rather sweet guy with a sense of responsibility. Oh, sure, he had an extra dollop of ego, but his desire to do a good job was seemingly as intense as his desire to sit at just the right angle, so as to not invite unflattering camera angles showing him “larger than life.” He would joke, posture, mingle and, generally, connect with us in a genuine way. Unfortunately, he seems to have lost that way.
Could we make no mistake about the fact that Rush Limbaugh is an addict, just like any other addict and, further, that he was busted. He broke the law scoring drugs, over the counter or not, abuse is abuse. His recidivism is no big surprise for anyone who has had even a glancing contact with addiction, but the enabling by his employer is and, of course, his employer is “the media,” with capital letters. Does is always have to be about the money? And what type of grueling, horrific, embarrassing, bottom has this man hit? He’s turned himself in and gotten probation. Wow! Wouldn’t the many people sitting in jail and prison today for drug-related crimes, non-million dollar earning folks like you and me, have loved that sweet deal? Only it’s rarely offered to people like us and that’s the problem. There is no parity and certainly that leads to resentment on the part of the public. We can see how Rush’s amazing first deal did not keep him clean and sober, can’t we? So, in that way, he struggles just like the common man. But really where did his common man go?
He broke the law and no euphemism in the world will change that reality, even if it’s financially convenient to say he’s “getting help.” It’s also not right that this man who always seems to feel he’s on the side of right, went right back on the air, after a somewhat cushy rehab interlude. My definition of “cushy” being he suffered no bumps in his career path and took full advantage of all that wealth and fame offers, including a private rehabilitation program. Interestingly enough, the media remained perplexingly mute on the details. They are not so when providing the details of another public persona’s misfortune and/or ruin.
The fact that Limbaugh has been high for a great deal of his radio employment, as he harangued others about issues, including drugs and the problems our country faces with drug addicts, is worth our scrutiny. Why was it okay to simply throw him right back on the air with his often intolerant verbiage and tolerate a superficial acknowledgment of wrongdoing on his part?
Despite the fact that a deep river of doubt runs through my assessment of public figures these days and their genuineness, I am surprised. Despite the fact that I agree with only one thing Rush Limbaugh ever says, that his name is Rush Limbaugh, I am disillusioned by his inability to take responsibility for his actions. There was never any sort of real, authentic acceptance of his own blame. Perhaps if high-paid folks, in particular, topped out at thirty thousand dollars a year for their “punishment,” they would find their honor and less their sense of entitlement. It’s tough to remain insulated from society when you’re concerned about whether you can afford two tanks of gas in one week.
And what about Rush’s intentional listeners, I find myself wondering. Do his drug usage admissions matter to them? Even if I don’t agree with the man’s obvious ratings-attracting methodology and dogma, wouldn’t his followers feel just an eensy-beensy bit misled?
So why should this seemingly tired topic matter? Because we should care enough to pay attention and consider the fact that, in the end, all we have is our name, our reputation and our desire to do the right thing, along with those neat little human survival characteristics that are encoded. Since when did we look the other way in the face of wrongdoing? Have we forgotten that youth is watching its elders? You see, even if we grown-ups can’t manage to pull it together for the sake of our nationalistic unity, could we at least unite around the concept that our kids need public figures who take responsibility? Are there no people of conscious who also moonlight as media moguls in our society?
Since when do we allow breathtakingly unequal punishments and judgments to take place before our very eyes? Before the world’s eyes? Who represents the professed voice of reason, provides a moral compass and projects a social consciousness? The answer is patently clear. We do, ladies and gentlemen. We do. Lying is not acceptable and it never has been. Perhaps, it’s fair to sum it all up in one, short little query of a sound bite.
Why do we allow those who judge so much, to be judged so little?
I worked with Rush Limbaugh for a brief period of time back in the late eighties. Oh, he won’t remember me. At the time, I was a worker bee on a television crew for a Sacramento-based comedy show called, “TV Lite,” much as I’ve remained throughout my adult life, whether I toil with pen, lesson plans or a cranky washing machine. I am happily one of the middle-class masses, keeping it real.
So why am I utilizing a famous man’s name with whom I have a rather tenuous connection to begin a discourse? I’m singling him out as a symbol of a trend. Who am I to offer up my opinion, asides and pithy reasoning? I am you. I am the public who has grown not just weary, but disillusioned by many of our public figures’ lack of individual, let alone collective, consciences. I am spurred onto commentary by the wholesale media dismissal of celebrity transgressions, incensing me to my very core, specifically Rush Limbaugh’s use of drugs. Maybe his personal struggle wouldn’t be my business, if he wasn’t on the air, blasting out vituperative indictments that I’m forced to hear when some of the fine retail establishments I frequent dial in his show for public consumption. The fact of the matter is that if it was you or I in the same circumstances, not only would we not be on the air, but I suspect we would not be free either, incarcerated for breaking the law. It puts a new spin on Lady Justice being blindfolded for impartiality, but rather she is blindfolded in order to be shielded from the truth.
Should public figures be held accountable for their actions? I think we would all agree that they shouldn’t be held any less accountable than any of us and, speaking of accountability, isn’t there an intrinsic element of this when you accept the role of public figure? We’re not talking about perfection, mind you, we’re talking about individual honesty and accountability. This seems especially cogent if you’ve taken the tact of telling people how to navigate the road of morality, seemingly filled with righteous and, dare I say, right answers, blasting those who do not think as you do and then, in the same breath, utter a casual “mea culpa,” shrug, and walk away as a coward.
When I knew Rush, however casually, that was the one thing he wasn’t; a righteous coward who lacked humanity. You see, back when I knew Rush he was a rather sweet guy with a sense of responsibility. Oh, sure, he had an extra dollop of ego, but his desire to do a good job was seemingly as intense as his desire to sit at just the right angle, so as to not invite unflattering camera angles showing him “larger than life.” He would joke, posture, mingle and, generally, connect with us in a genuine way. Unfortunately, he seems to have lost that way.
Could we make no mistake about the fact that Rush Limbaugh is an addict, just like any other addict and, further, that he was busted. He broke the law scoring drugs, over the counter or not, abuse is abuse. His recidivism is no big surprise for anyone who has had even a glancing contact with addiction, but the enabling by his employer is and, of course, his employer is “the media,” with capital letters. Does is always have to be about the money? And what type of grueling, horrific, embarrassing, bottom has this man hit? He’s turned himself in and gotten probation. Wow! Wouldn’t the many people sitting in jail and prison today for drug-related crimes, non-million dollar earning folks like you and me, have loved that sweet deal? Only it’s rarely offered to people like us and that’s the problem. There is no parity and certainly that leads to resentment on the part of the public. We can see how Rush’s amazing first deal did not keep him clean and sober, can’t we? So, in that way, he struggles just like the common man. But really where did his common man go?
He broke the law and no euphemism in the world will change that reality, even if it’s financially convenient to say he’s “getting help.” It’s also not right that this man who always seems to feel he’s on the side of right, went right back on the air, after a somewhat cushy rehab interlude. My definition of “cushy” being he suffered no bumps in his career path and took full advantage of all that wealth and fame offers, including a private rehabilitation program. Interestingly enough, the media remained perplexingly mute on the details. They are not so when providing the details of another public persona’s misfortune and/or ruin.
The fact that Limbaugh has been high for a great deal of his radio employment, as he harangued others about issues, including drugs and the problems our country faces with drug addicts, is worth our scrutiny. Why was it okay to simply throw him right back on the air with his often intolerant verbiage and tolerate a superficial acknowledgment of wrongdoing on his part?
Despite the fact that a deep river of doubt runs through my assessment of public figures these days and their genuineness, I am surprised. Despite the fact that I agree with only one thing Rush Limbaugh ever says, that his name is Rush Limbaugh, I am disillusioned by his inability to take responsibility for his actions. There was never any sort of real, authentic acceptance of his own blame. Perhaps if high-paid folks, in particular, topped out at thirty thousand dollars a year for their “punishment,” they would find their honor and less their sense of entitlement. It’s tough to remain insulated from society when you’re concerned about whether you can afford two tanks of gas in one week.
And what about Rush’s intentional listeners, I find myself wondering. Do his drug usage admissions matter to them? Even if I don’t agree with the man’s obvious ratings-attracting methodology and dogma, wouldn’t his followers feel just an eensy-beensy bit misled?
So why should this seemingly tired topic matter? Because we should care enough to pay attention and consider the fact that, in the end, all we have is our name, our reputation and our desire to do the right thing, along with those neat little human survival characteristics that are encoded. Since when did we look the other way in the face of wrongdoing? Have we forgotten that youth is watching its elders? You see, even if we grown-ups can’t manage to pull it together for the sake of our nationalistic unity, could we at least unite around the concept that our kids need public figures who take responsibility? Are there no people of conscious who also moonlight as media moguls in our society?
Since when do we allow breathtakingly unequal punishments and judgments to take place before our very eyes? Before the world’s eyes? Who represents the professed voice of reason, provides a moral compass and projects a social consciousness? The answer is patently clear. We do, ladies and gentlemen. We do. Lying is not acceptable and it never has been. Perhaps, it’s fair to sum it all up in one, short little query of a sound bite.
Why do we allow those who judge so much, to be judged so little?
No comments:
Post a Comment