Cosby story gets curiouser and curiouser
The DA with jurisdiction in this case has been on the local newscasts a lot (he’s Bruce Cutler and he gets a lot of face time on the Philly newscasts) and he had been making it sound as if the whole affair would be over in a matter of minutes. With today’s developments, it looks as if we might be watching re-enactments on Court TV some time in the not too distant future.
The young lady who filed the complaint has gone public and she claims to have audiotapes of conversations between her and Cosby.
Cosby’s people are floating a story that the alleged victim’s mother phoned up Cosby early on in the proceedings and demanded money. (Cosby’s people want us to believe that the alleged victim and her family are in it for the cash.)
Cosby is on the record as saying the contact was consensual.
Zooming out even further, other folks are debating whether the imbroglio discredits Cosby’s recent speeches with regard to the problems of inner-city minorities. The contention being that Cosby (who, we’re to believe, has been a faithful husband up until now) automatically forfeits his moral authority due to the salacious nature of the allegations. Did anyone believe that Cosby was faithful prior to this? Regardless, did it have anything to do with the content of his recent speeches? Good question. Are we capable of separating Cliff Huxtable from Bill Cosby? Does Cosby’s moral authority derive from his identity as Bill Cosby or from his faux identity as Cliff Huxtable? Or a combination of both?
Looks like it’s going to trial. This has got all the earmarks of a story that lasts for a good two years, at least 18 months.
No Responses
Reply to: Cosby story gets curiouser and curiouser
At the risk of sounding pious, truth does not become a lie when the messenger is discredited. Moral authority should not be given to flawed human beings. Morality and moral authority comes from something higher than us…Tommy Chong.
Mr. Chong:
You are right and, then again, you are right.
You hardly sound pious. If this is pious, you should sound pious more often.
When you say that “truth does not become a lie when the messenger is discredited.” Are we talking about Mr. Cosby or the young lady who has lodged the charges?
Our purpose when we posted was not to discredit anyone. We are merely setting the scene for the upcoming debate. When we awoke this morning, we were greeted by a debate on one of the major networks about whether or not Mr. Cosby’s message was now tainted somehow by the recent allegations. (We don’t think so. It does make things a bit sticky, though, yes?) The argument goes that, Cosby has fallen, his messge must now be regarded as somehow having less gravity, less credibility, since he might be proven to be a philanderer.
When you say, “Moral authority should not be given to flawed human beings,” you are pretty much eliminating most of the population of the planet. We surely don’t think you mean that. (Or do you?) Moral authority (or credibility) is earned. For many, it matters not what the messenger does– he’ll still retain much of his authority. A complex calculus takes place– the messsage is separated from the messenger and the equation is re-worked with the new knowledge. As to whether Mr. Cosby retains any credibility after all this remains to be seen. If Cosby was doing a Dr. Phil number– counseling folks on marital relations and its importance to stability– then he may have a serious cred gap.
When you say, “Morality and moral authority comes from something higher than us,” you are getting heavy on us. We’re not prepared to debate that point. But we sure do appreciate your posting! Thanks!
i don’t think the first commenter was intending to be commenting AS tommy chong, but rather indicating, after an ellipsis, that tommy chong was the authority because he’s “higher” than everyone else
that said, i think we should start getting known criminals to start giving bad advice to kids
Dear Mister MYQ:
Yes, but wouldn’t it be really cool if it _was_ Tommy Chong?
C’mon… let us have our fantasy.
…Cheech Marin.