CNN: Sex is "worse" than severe bodily harm

Here is a prime example of what's wrong in our society. Today, a little after 1:00 EDT, CNN anchor Randi Kaye was relating the story of the Miami University scandal. Convicted swindler Nevin Shapiro lavished money on the Hurricanes' football team for years.

As Kaye related what money Mr. Shapiro lavished on the players, she said this:

The alleged gifts are jaw dropping. Listen to this. They include hundreds of thousands of dollars in cash, cars, jewelry rides on his yacht, paid trips to high-end restaurants and nightclubs. But that was just the start.

Now comes the really bad part of her quote (Emphasis mine):

Shapiro also said the players were offered bounties for injuring players on opposing teams. But what's even worse, the former booster says he paid to get prostitutes for players...

"What's even worse"? Are you telling me that paying to have a young, virile college athlete spend time with a hooker is WORSE than paying the same player to hurt and possibly MAIM another human being?

What a pathetic comment on our society. What I don't know is if the writer of the piece was pandering to the viewing audience, thinking that CNN's demographic actually thinks that sex is WORSE than severe bodily harm, or if the writer himself (or herself) actually thinks such a bassackward thought.

If it's only in the writer's mind, he/she is one sick puppy and needs a reality check (Therapy, as well?). If the line was specifically targeted for the audience, CNN must really think that we're more hung up on sex than violence and the Corporation is preaching to the choir. Either way it's absolutely despicable.

As George Carlin said:

I'd rather have my son watch a film with two people making love than two people trying to kill one another.

It is the responsibility for CNN and all the media to keep that in mind when covering their stories.

"Entitlements" is a dirty word

Last week, my brother and I were lamenting that the word "entitlements," representing Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, etc., had such a negative connotation. We felt that it should not be used when discussing these issues.

Well, yesterday, Miles Mogulescu over at the Huffington Post coincidentally addressed this issue. I agree with him wholeheartedly!

Every time someone else in a discussion starts to talk about "Entitlements", they should say, "Oh, you mean the Middle Class Safety Net." Whenever someone talks about the need for "Entitlement Reform" or "Entitlement Cuts" they should say, "Oh, you mean shredding the Middle Class Safety Net."

He eloquently puts forth the reason he, my brother and I dislike the word:

It has the ring of spoiled children who are entitled to something that they don't really deserve. It's also not accurate. The middle class pays for its Social Security and Medicare with their payroll taxes during their working life so that they have something to fall back on in their old age. They're "entitled" to it, not because they're spoiled children asking for treats from daddy, but because society promised it to them in return for 40-50 years of having payroll taxes deducted from their paychecks.

He challenges the media to quit using it:

To win the political debate, Democratic office holders; liberal news hosts like Lawrence O'Donnell, Rachel Maddow, and Ed Shultz; progressive websites like The Huffington Post, Daily Kos, and Talking Points Memo; liberal columnists like Eugene Robinson, E.J. Dionne, and Paul Krugman; and progressive publications like The Nation and Mother Jones, have to change their political vocabulary.

Hear, Hear! I vow NEVER to use that word again. From now on "Middle Class Safety Net" supplants the "E" word in my lexicon. I challenge anyone who reads this (the few who do) to do the same and to pass it on to all of your family and friends, and, if you're a political writer, incorporate the phrase into your writing.