search
top

Jason Whitlock, Bob Costas, Keith Olbermann, And Someone You Should Listen To, JR Salzman.

This past Saturday, a 25 year old NFL linebacker from the Kansas City Chiefs Jovan Belcher shot and killed his 22-year-old girlfriend Kasandra M. Perkins in front of his mother and the couple’s three month old baby daughter. Belcher then drove to Arrowhead Stadium where he was seen by his general manager Scott Pioli and coach Romeo Crennel standing in front of the practice facility door pointing a gun to his head.

Crennel and Pioli tried to talk to Belcher but to no avail. When the police arrived on the scene, Belcher pulled the trigger, ending his life.

Following this tragedy, columnist Jason Whitlock proceeded to write a column on how the game between the Kansas City Chiefs and the Carolina Panthers should not have been played.

Whitlock then took on the issue of gun control saying:

I would argue that your rationalizations [on whether to play the game or not] speak to how numb we are in this society to gun violence and murder. We’ve come to accept our insanity. We’d prefer to avoid seriously reflecting upon the absurdity of the prevailing notion that the second amendment somehow enhances our liberty rather than threatens it.

How many young people have to die senselessly? How many lives have to be ruined before we realize the right to bear arms doesn’t protect us from a government equipped with stealth bombers, predator drones, tanks and nuclear weapons?

Our current gun culture simply ensures that more and more domestic disputes will end in the ultimate tragedy, and that more convenience-store confrontations over loud music coming from a car will leave more teenage boys bloodied and dead.

Whitlock blames the wrong thing here, in our opinion. It is not the weapon that matters, but the fact that too many people feel privileged to items and feel they can rob others to get them. We don’t teach how to resolve differences anymore and too many couples think that marriage is a 24/7 date. (It isn’t – it is a 30 hour a day commitment over 400 days of the year.) Whitlock, who supported OJ Simpson who used a knife to kill two people, would rather blame a gun than the person holding it.

On Sunday. the Chiefs played the Panthers and defeated them 27 – 21. Before the game the Chiefs held a moment of silence not for Belcher, but for all victims of domestic violence.

During the half time of the Sunday night game on NBC, Bob Costas took to the air to denounce gun ownership as well.

Many people have not been thrilled with Costas’ attack on the Second Amendment. We here are Raised on Hoecakes disagree with it as well. We support the right for both he and Whitlock to say and write what they did, but we don’t have to support the ideas they espoused.

One person who did not support Costas was JR Salzman who tweeted “Getting 2nd Amendment advice from Costas is like getting career advice from @KeithOlbermann”

Ouch.

The twitter war was on:

It is that last tweet that caught our eye. Just who this JR Salzman?

Luckily for us, the fine folks over at “This Ain’t Hell…” have the answer:

(Salzman also has a blog called “Lumberjack in the Desert.”)

We don’t want to disparage reporters and columnists, but we have to say that when it comes to such things as weapons and the Constitution, we are going to give slightly more credence to those who helped provide and protect the freedoms of this country rather than those who simply use them. Whitlock, Costas and Olbermann never served in the military. Salzman volunteered for duty after the attacks on this country on 9/11.

You can do what you want, but for us, when it comes to taking to heart the words of an American, we are going to shy away from those who seek to strip us of our God given, natural and Constitutionally enumerated rights and listen to the guy who fought to protect those rights and paid a high price for doing so.

As we said, you can turn your ears to whatever direction you want, but we know where we are going.



15 Responses to “Jason Whitlock, Bob Costas, Keith Olbermann, And Someone You Should Listen To, JR Salzman.”

  1. MarshaMarshaMarsha says:

    Aafterwit, what does his being an amputee have to do with whether Salzman was factually correct or not? You’re playing on people’s sympathies and admiration of military service to excuse Salzman’s unprovoked shot at someone who does respect the sacrifice of vets, but naturally expects people to know what they’re talking about when they reference him. If JR makes a silly analogy and gets corrected by the person being referenced, he shouldn’t be surprised — or resentful. And he shouldn’t invoke his service as a defense when he’s wrong on the facts. IMO that’s not a good example for a warrior to set.

    • AAfterwit says:

      MArshaMarshaMarsha,

      Thanks for your comment.

      You’re all over the board with what you are trying to say, but that’s okay.

      Salman’s shot at Costas was not different that Costas’ and Whitlock’s shot at the millions and millions of gun owners in this country who use their weapons in a responsible manner. So while Costas and Whitlock sit in the rarefied air of not having to even sit in the same seats as the common man, much less have a weapon for protection of their loved ones, Salzman does.

      I simply asked the question of “who should people listen to?” A person who has experience with weapons, served the country, and paid a price for that service? Or someone who didn’t do any of those things?

      You are free to listen to whomever you want.

      Thanks to people like Salzman – not Costas, Whitlock or Olberman – this is a free country and you can make your own choice.

      A. Afterwit.

  2. MarshaMarshaMarsha says:

    People should listen to whoever got it right. JR erred when he implied that you couldn’t get good career advice from Olbermann — who in addition to having a successful 33-yr career himself has mentored a number of people now enjoying successful careers in broadcasting. There’s no getting around that fact, whether you agree with his politics or not.

    And I thought that’s what JR was defending the country FOR: the freedom of all citizens to pursue happiness and be productive taxpayers. Costas is responsible for Costas’s opinions. Why bring Olbermann into the discussion if he didn’t like what Costas said? Doesn’t make sense. If he’s so proud of his military exploits and log rolling prowess, why does JR feel the need to mention the name of a successful sportscaster and newsman to draw attention to himself? Let him bask in his own glory; that should be enough.

    And by the way, don’t forget that journalists, including analysts and opinion writers, also play an important role in keeping us free!

    • AAfterwit says:

      MarshaMarshaMarsha,

      I would suspect that most people would say that being fired the number of times over disagreements with management as Olbermann has is not good career advice. I would argue that after leaving ESPN, Olbermann has not been successful at anything he has tried.

      Olbermann has a history of getting a job, believing he is better than everyone around him, getting fired, and burning the bridges behind him.

      In no way shape or form is that “good career advice.”

      You are correct that Costas is responsible for Costas’ opinion, so why did he bring Jason Whitlock’s column into the mix? In essence, you are saying that it was okay for Costas to comment on what Whitlock said using whatever terms Costas chose, but it was wrong for Salzman to comment on Costas using the terms and similes Salsman chose.

      And in case you missed it, because it appears you have, Salzman didn’t bring his service into the conversation – Olbermann did. Salzmann made a humorous comparison on Costas’ comments. Olbermann decided to attack Salzmann’s service.

      Frankly sir, if you believe the work Olbermann, Costas and Whitlock have done in “defense” of this country comes anywhere close to that which Salzman has done, you will never understand what is being said in this discussion.

      A. Afterwit.

  3. MarshaMarshaMarsha says:

    The point is, it was still a bad analogy. Olbermann is knowledgeable about his business and has used that knowledge not only to advance his own career but to foster the careers of others. He’s been fired twice in 33 years, which sounds about average for the broadcast industry. Those are facts, and everyone is entitled to keep the factual record straight regarding his own life and accomplishments. Hey, JR certainly didn’t waste any time doing so! So if it’s okay for JR to stand up for himself, it should be okay for the individuals he remarks about to answer back also when he comes up a little short on the facts. And if he snarks at someone, perhaps they may choose to overlook it. But it seems to me that if they want to snark back, it’s within their rights.

    • AAfterwit says:

      MarshaMarshaMarsha,

      Olbermann has been fired or resigned under pressure at least 5 times – not the two that you claim. That doesn’t include the number of times his contracts were not renewed which is typical in the industry. It is very rare to get fired in the industry – especially in the middle of a contract. Face it, Olbermann has burned so many bridges in the past that any “advice” he gives on career advancement would be suspect to most rational thinking people.

      BTW – where is Olbermann working now? Or do you consider being fired from your last full time position and not being able to get a full time gig evidence of how one should advance a career?

      If you don’t see a difference between what was obviously a humorous simile and a blatant attack on a person, that is on you – not on Salzman or anyone else. Oh, and in case you missed it, Olbermann was so proud of what he said he removed the tweets from his account. Is that an example of what you claim is “sticking up” for himself? Or just another example of trying to ride the world of evidence of another career disaster move?

      If you want to worship at the feet of Olbermann, that is fine. Go for it. Have fun. We won’t try and stop you.

      A. Afterwit.

  4. MarshaMarshaMarsha says:

    I see it as neither humorous nor an attack. It’s but one of the endless gratuitous shots tweeted at and about people who don’t agree with one, and I think that’s low, esp. when one excuses the behavior by saying so-and-so “is a public figure,” so he or she should expect it. I heard the following from a very wise person: public figures are human beings.

    Twitter is a great vehicle for bringing people closer and making the world smaller but it’s also opened the way for people just to be nasty at will, and that frankly sets my teeth on edge. I stated an objective fact, the number of times in his life a person has been fired, namely, twice. That’s verifiable. Why people resign from jobs neither you nor I know unless they tell, and in the aftermath employers are going to say whatever puts THEMSELVES in the best light. (If in doubt, check your own experience and that of friends and relatives; I wouldn’t want to stake my life on anything bosses say about someone who chose to leave their employ, whether in the middle of a contract or otherwise. They don’t have any compunction about firing people in the middle of a contract or any time.)

    My beef with Salzman is that he got sensitive about someone questioning his worthiness as a representative of his occupation after he just thoughtlessly did the same thing to that person. Golden Rule, anyone?

    Unprovoked sniping on Twitter needs to stop. It would improve the experience more than anything.

    • AAfterwit says:

      MarshaMarshaMArsha,

      I want to make sure that I have this straight…. you did not see Salzman’s comment as “humorous nor an attack” but it was a “shot.” Clearly we are using terms that mean different things.

      Secondly, it is amusing that you condemn Salzman for his “shot” but apparently worship at the foot of Olbermann who made a failed career out of making shots at others.

      Thirdly, it is amusing that you say employers are known for saying things that prop themselves up while it is Olbermann who has constantly attacked and made derisive statements concerning any station or position from which he has been fired or resigned under pressure. As for my experience, I have never been fired from a job at the end of a contract, much less in the middle of a contract. Most people may get fired once, but seldom the number of times which Olbermann has been fired. Of course, if you think that Olbermann’s actions are good career choices, you are free to follow them. Real people in the real world would disagree with you, but you are free to believe that which you want.

      BTW – I noticed you forgot to answer where Olbermann is working now. For such an “exemplary career path,” he is not working and no one seems to want to hire him because of his childish actions and hubris.

      Lastly, Olbermann is out of work while Salxman is a decorated vet who won an ESPY and still competes at a high level. If you want to compare where both men are now in their careers and find Olbermann in the superior position, that’s just a denial of reality in my opinion.

      Your final statement on “unproved sniping” on Twitter is demonstrative of sheer hypocrisy. Olbermann made a career out of sniping and continues to snip on Twitter. It seems he, not Salzman, couldn’t take the heat.

      A. Afterwit.

  5. MarshaMarshaMarsha says:

    I define a shot as a dig. That’s how I saw it – as just a thoughtless quip about someone JR doesn’t know much about, but on which he’s fairly confident he can get agreement from the folks he agrees with. A sort of “bonding” remark, you might call it.

    It’s easy to confirm that Olbermann has been fired fired twice, and only twice (from Fox Sports and recently from Current). And again, regarding the reason for resignations – since you expressed an interest in who your readers think people should listen to – generally speaking I will accept an employee’s description of the work environment, past or present, over the employer’s. The reason should be obvious, but maybe it’s not.

    What it boils down to, I think, is how much responsibility you, as an employee, feel for the quality of what ultimately goes out to the public. Most employers will let their workers know, through their attitude mostly, that the quality of the product is a concern above the worker’s pay grade, even if his pay is $10-million. But many employees can’t accept that arrangement. And especially if what’s going out to the public has their name on it, they feel a pressure from within that it be as good as it can be, not just “good enough.”

    If you’re the boss, such employees are a blessing when they bring something you wanted to know to your attention. If you didn’t want to hear it – not so much. And just as with doctors who don’t listen when a patient says he has a pain, if he’s insistent, they think HE’S the pain. The result, if you really care about it getting better and the dude with the power doesn’t want to hear it, will be friction.

    Does that make you a bad guy? It might make your audience and your staff look up to you. We’re bright up in this country to admire mavericks! It might also get you an undeserved reputation in a close-knit industry as a “difficult” employee. This has happened similarly to actors and actresses – Bette Davis was Exhibit A – down through show business history. When they fought for the project and got their way, the outcome was excellence. But even a huge box office was never enough to raise SOME of their employers’ comfort levels with them afterwards.

    What can you do? How do you solve that? Some people can’t act out someone else’s vision night after night, it feels dishonest and irresponsible. I have a close friend who’s in a creative field and has run into the same thing; this is not a rare occurrence. And the really dumb, simplistic reaction on the part of outside observers would be to think it’s only the employer for whom such situations are “difficult.”

    As for Salzman, I believe he brought the difficulty on himself this time by not making sure that his “joke” based on fact – REAL fact. But you already knew my thoughts on that. :- )

    • AAfterwit says:

      MArshaMarshaMarsha,

      So in your world, a “dig” is not an attack? I am sorry, but that’s laughable.

      Factually, Olbermann has been let go from at least 3 positions and walked away from many others. If Olbermann had one issue with one or two employers, that would be one thing, but he has not. His career is littered with burned bridges from previous jobs. That says to most people in the world that it is Olbermann, not the employers that has the problem. There is no good career advice that anyone ever gives that says “burn bridges with your former employer.” None. That is not up for discussion or debate. It is a fact.

      As for your contention that “some people can’t act out someone else’s vision night after night, it feels dishonest and irresponsible,” it is time to blow that issue out of the water as well. Olbermann was given complete control over the content and style of his show on CurrenTV, and he still couldn’t get along with people.

      It seems that you have a real big set of blinders on when it comes to Olbermann. You want to hold Salzman accountable for an accurate statement (as evidenced by Olbermann’s lack of employment and no opportunities), but yet you won’t admit that Olbermann made a career out of taking pot shots at people.

      Amazing.

      We are going to have to agree to disagree on this.

      A. Afterwit

  6. MarshaMarshaMarsha says:

    Para 5, above, sentence 2: ‘bright up’ should be ‘brought up.”

    And last para, first sentence should read ‘was based on fact – REAL fact.’

    I wish spellcheck could see those.

  7. MarshaMarshaMarsha says:

    AAfterwit, excellent! we’re down from five dismissals to three, we seem to have made significant progress, so at this high point I’m going to take my “winnings” and prudently exit stage right, LOL.

    I have to say you seem like a pretty nice cat and you’ve been more than gracious, affording me unlimited space on your webpage to make my case. For two people who don’t agree on much, we still managed to produce a substantive and surprisingly affable discussion this afternoon.

    Have a nice holiday and keep our vets in your thoughts. They have the country’s thanks and every comfort in the world coming to them. That is something we DO agree on.

    Happy trails,
    ~MMM

    • AAfterwit says:

      MarshaMarshaMarsha,

      There are no winnings to be had here for you, sir. In fact, your claim of “winnings” simply demonstrates an inability to read and understand as we are not “down from five dismissals to three” as I never claimed that.

      The original claim was “Olbermann has been fired or resigned under pressure at least 5 times.

      We area still there.

      And once again, I will stake the claim that Olbermann’s career choices and the way he has left positions is not the way any true professional would. You are free to not believe me but history shows otherwise.

      Good luck to you.

      A. Aftertwit.

  8. MarshaMarshaMarsha says:

    That was supposed to be the last one but, okay, one more.

    When someone puts a word in quotes, it means it’s to be read ironically; in other words, it means the opposite of what it says. I was laughing at my complete inability to move you.

    Just trying to leave on a positive note, giving you ups for letting me say my say and… well, you saw the rest.

    I still mean it, too.

    ~MMM

top