Jamie Dupree: Personification of the amorality of a Washington insider…

There are some otherwise decent people who I just cannot respect.  Jamie Dupree has become one of them.

Jamie Dupree is an articulate Washington insider who frequently reports on the Neil Boortz radio show.  Apparently Neil thinks a lot of him.  I no longer share Neil’s admiration.

In a conversation with Jamie a couple of days ago on his show, Neil correctly observed that those who voted for Obama acted stupidly, or words to that effect.  Jamie quickly defended the electorate as acting intelligently in electing Obama.  Neil briefly challenged Jamie’s logic.  Jamie  dismissed Neil's challenge with some half-assed comment about everyone having intelligent opinions that may be different from ours.

So I wrote to Jamie about my feeling of his apparent lack of conviction or ideals.  I wrote:

“That attitude is devoid of any discernment of right vs. wrong, good vs. evil, beauty vs. ugly, dumb vs. smart, peaceful vs. violent and any other word combination that recognizes differences in values. You sound absolutely "value neutral", which, in a couple of words, equates to "amoral" and "useless." Do you see everything through undiscerning rose colored glasses? That makes me ill.”

Jamie responded within a half hour (it almost felt as though I was “instant messaging” him.)  Anyway, he replied:

“Hi …  To some people, electing Obama was intelligent, to others it was dumb. That sounds about right, because the people who voted for Bush did so because they thought he was best prepared for the job, while there were others who couldn't stand him for a minute. That's what makes our system so frustrating - and yet so good.

The listeners/readers/viewers are the ones who make the personal judgments on "right vs. wrong, good vs. evil, beauty vs. ugly, dumb vs. smart, peaceful vs. violent" (as you wrote).

Sorry that makes you "ill" but it's not my job to declare who is right and who is wrong. Your views are naturally different from other listeners of mine. If I side with you, then others are angered. If I side with them, then you are angered. That's not my job.

It may seem odd to you, but I really don't care who wins the elections; my job is to cover them and report on the action in DC from the White House to the Congress, in order to give you a better perspective on what is going on.

If that makes me "value neutral," so be it. I am not in this job to decide which party is right or wrong, which side better represents good or evil.

Thanks for listening and see you on the Boortz show tomorrow.

Jamie Dupree”

I have the same reaction to this reply as I did to the reply of Romney’s Middle East advisor defending Romney’s ignorant statement that “Jihadism is no part of Islam.”  It is sickening to me to hear ignorant statements from people we trust to know better.

Jamie justifies his defense of the ignorant electorate by saying, in effect, it is not his job to judge.  He has listeners/readers/viewers that have different views and he must not offend.   Great. I get the distinct impression that if he was a reporter in 1939 Germany that he would try his damnedest to remain neutral so he would not offend anyone, especially Hitler supporters.

Jamie’s “thou shalt not judge” career priority causes him to appear dangerously out of touch with the reality of significant characteristics of the electorate.  The liberals and others I have spoken with who voted for Obama are at the bottom of the food chain of awareness of anything political or economic.  For the most part they either have no interest in the news, expose themselves only to the liberal main stream media, have a vested interest in greater taxpayer funded government largess, or voted purely because of race.  They are uninformed and prefer it that way.  Conservatives I have spoken with about this claim the same observation of their liberal friends.

And Jamie denies electorate ignorance?  He wants to remain neutral so that he does not offend?  Actually, Jamie, I’m offended.  And I would wager that thousands of others of your listeners are also offended by your lack of discernment and principle in your defense of the ignorant electorate.  This is little different than the amoral mafia attorney defending the indefensible, or the used car salesman hyping an overpriced oil burner.   After all, its only a job and he has to make a living.  Now THAT is a media whore!

Yes, Jamie, you do make me ill.  And no, Jamie, I doubt I’ll be listening tomorrow.