Third Party & Independents Archives

April 12, 2007

It's Not About Imus, Anymore!

Don Imus’s reckless, condescending and racially derogatory remarks are losing the spotlight to the reaction to them. One man made foul remarks about good people in a poor and unthinking attempt at street-common humor. He apologized, profusely, and repeatedly. He got fired - he wasn’t hired to not think before opening his mouth. It was just. That is all there is to that story. Now the bigger story is unfolding.

Who is hurting Black Americans in America more, Black Americans or white talk show hosts? Hands down, it is Black Americans who invent the 'nappy headed ho' gutter talk and make a living off it in rap music and now a movie genre dedicated to Black Americans degrading and spoofing Black Americans. There's good money in Blacks spewing degradation at other Blacks and Whites. Ironic that it took a white man to bring this issue to the fore.

The bigger story is two fold. First, the American premise that if profit can be made, risk is acceptable. Second, racism in America is culturally pandemic. Our churches are still largely segregated. Our schools becoming segregated again. Our neighborhoods in our cities are re-segregating. Our cultural arts have been segregating for decades. America likes segregation - they just don't want it exposed. Which explains the uproar over Imus' remarks. His remarks exposed a culture tolerant of segregation and racism. For that he had to be punished.

Now the conspiracy theorists are hitting the media. Some Black writers are saying this is a precursor to infringement of 1st Amendment Rights about to come crashing down on the Black rap music industry. Some White writers are saying Rev. Al Sharpton and Sen. Barack Obama are laying the groundwork for a new race war in America. But the simple truth is, America is still struggling with class and racial bigotry that spans the length of its existence.

Will America seize this opportunity to focus on American community and neutralize class and racial differences to the point that they become irrelevant? Phrased another way, will America grow from this? Or, will this simply become another political issue to be used to divide Americans further?

Those who are familiar with the social sciences are aware of the immensely important role public leaders play overtly, and subtly, in role modeling the values and standards which millions of onlookers will emulate, adopt, and adapt to. Is it time we the people demanded more and higher standards from our public figures? That is afterall, what all this hullabaloo about Imus' remarks are really about.

Will consumers stop buying the hate and violence in video games and music as the advertisers at MSNBC and CBS stopped purchasing advertising? Will politicians stop campaigning on issues that divide America and run on solutions to problems that we all face in coming years? Will we as a people, rebuke, withhold our vote from, and withdraw our support for icons who make their living degrading and stereotyping other people?

Culture is such a wide and pervasive phenomenon. It takes more than a politician, or religious leader, or rock star, to change its fundamentals. It takes a vast majority of the society's people to willingly, and consciously, exert effort to alter its (their own) fundamental assumptions and biases. We have a wake up call, thanks to Don Imus.

But, will we delegate the effort and work to alter our racial and class bigotry to our leaders, pundits and politicians? Or will we as Americans, seize this opportunity for our own, and keep the issue alive after personal gain has come and gone for public figures. Will we continue to change ourselves as representatives of the America we want her to be?

There is much work to be done. The whole street gutter music industry needs our attention as well as movie makers. The public can censor with their wallets and there is no 1st Amendment issue at play. There are many more Imus' to deal with as well. Here are just a few examples:

Limbaugh: “The government's been taking care of [young blacks] their whole lives”

Boortz: Rep. McKinney “looks like a ghetto slut”

Boortz: Islam is a “deadly virus” and “we're going to wait far too long to develop a vaccine to find a way to fight this”

CNN's Beck to first-ever Muslim congressman: “[W]hat I feel like saying is, 'Sir, prove to me that you are not working with our enemies' ”

Carlson: “[G]rouchy feminists with mustaches” control the Democratic Party

Posted by David R. Remer at April 12, 2007 06:17 PM
Comments
Comment #216262

When I think of the bigger story this week, wouldn’t be three men freed of charges in North Carolina? Men that were convicted by the media and others before the trial even began. Perhaps a more catchy headline: “Three Crackers Set Free” might garner more attention from the media.

I agree that we have bought our way into the kind of garbage our children want to embody. So I focus on more time than my parents had to on filtering my teenagers music, movies, clothes, and friends. Set the example at home and be overly vigalent. Win the big battles.

Posted by: Honest at April 12, 2007 08:30 PM
Comment #216265

Honest, that has been my approach as well. Where my daughter and I disagree on culture, I only ask her to listen and appreciate what I have to say about it, then she is on her own to make up her own mind about what she listens to, watches, and buys.

Posted by: David R. Remer at April 12, 2007 08:40 PM
Comment #216276

David

I never liked Imus. But if you want to be consistent - today Imus; tomorrow Rosie.

One growing problem is that we are so hypertensive about race and gender that have expanded the definitional of racism to include behavior. I take President Clinton’s sister Solja definition. The proper test of racism is replacement. If you replace black with white or the reserve and the outcome changes just because of that, it is racist. If not, it is not. Culture is not a part of race, since any human can learn any human culture. I dislike rap music as much as I dislike heavy metal. When I say heavy metal sucks, people just attribute it to musical taste. If I say rap sucks, I may well have to follow it was some explanation about why it is not a racist statement.

I also believe what Rice says about the soft bigotry of low expectations. I was recently complimented for my “enlightenment” for mentoring three excellent black employees into higher level positions. At first I felt a confused, but as I though about it I got annoyed. I promoted these people because they were the best qualified. Our society has more positions for talented people than we have talented people to fill them. They did not require my benevolence to get ahead. I helped them in order to strengthen the organization. The idea that these qualified hard working people need to get ahead by means other than their qualifications was as degrading than using the N-word. The other piece of silliness was the idea that some jobs were “reserved” for whites. Nobody ever informed me. Maybe I do not know the codes.

Too many people believe in this crap.

The basketball players and the media handled this all wrong. The proper response is, “Who cares what that old guy with the bad hair thinks?” Sticks and stones etc. Get over it.

BTW - McKinney did more to create and enhance racist stereotypes than anybody else.

Posted by: Jack at April 12, 2007 09:09 PM
Comment #216283

Here we go again… only some people have freedom of speech and civil rights?

I never liked Imus. I wouldn’t ever say what Imus said. The public could have put him out of business by not listening.
Jack’s right - what about the crackers? and white trash?
Anybody ever been fired or raked over the coals for that?
I do not agree with those that say ‘we can call our own kind ho’s but you can’t’ - if she is a ho she is a ho. And so what if she is anway???? A bunch of ho-mongers had to help make her that way.

Those guys at Duke suffered horribly for something they didn’t do.

Just wait until the campaigns really get fired up - people come out and make things up, usually it is in the form of a question. It becomes the gospel truth before a candidate can react - sometimes before they even know about it.

We teach our children to be nice, to get along, to share, not to make up lies about people. Then what? We grow up and those rules we were taught don’t matter anymore?
This problem is in EVERY community. It’s pathetic.
What it is to be a true american has been lost.

Posted by: Dawn at April 12, 2007 09:37 PM
Comment #216286

Jack and Dawn, I hear you. We have a very long way yet to go before we as a people have matured to the point of treating others with the respect and regard their personality and behavior merit.

My chief concern in this article is the for-profit industry America has created whose main currency is derogation and insult, and it extends throughout all aspects of our society from the poorer people of color to the wealthy people of color, from the poorer people of light color to the whitest of the wealthy.

American is too much about exploiting others for personal pleasure or gain, and not enough about bringing the best out of each other, which is implied as a goal in our Declaration of Independence.

Posted by: David R. Remer at April 12, 2007 09:52 PM
Comment #216293

David,

Thanks for this topic. You’ve hit on important themes, but have prioritized them incorrectly.

The issue is endemic racism/sexism in America.

That is the outrage that African Americans and women are speaking to. It is what offended the girls of Rutgers.

Whether that be from Rap Artists, fawning D.A.’s, so called political leaders/opportunists, or Radio show hosts and commentators, African Americans and Women are sick of hearing it.

Moreover, they are tired of being told progress has been made and then asked to continue to be subjected to these sick and twisted values.

Perhaps African Americans feel emboldened with the rise of Obama in a less than stellar field of candidates for President. I say more power to them. Let the purge begin. I am all for belittling racist ideas and their spouters, even if the ideas were merely aquired through living inour culture.

Perhaps Women feel emboldened by Hilary. Ditto.

It time to shatter some glass ceilings and break some bonds to old ideas.It’s past time for change in Iraq. It’s past time for change in America.

I welcome this dialogue.

Posted by: gergle at April 12, 2007 10:04 PM
Comment #216297

Imus is an idiot, and I’ve never been able to listen to him for more than two minutes.

Nonetheless, his idiotic words were just that—words. So even if he deserves to lose his job, or should never have had such a job in the first place, there’s something nauseating about seeing the “Reverend” Sharpton, whose past racial incitements have literally left him with blood on his hands, spearheading this whole thing.

Sharpton and Imus deserve each other, in my opinion. In a perfect world, they’d be locked in a sound-proof room where they could just spew stupidity at each other all day long without the rest of us having to hear it.

Posted by: Loyal Opposition at April 12, 2007 10:08 PM
Comment #216301

So I’ll stretch a correlation.

The decline in religion in America is correlated with the decrease in our base morality/accountability.

As a society it is easier for “us” to be taken advantage of because we don’t answer to a higher power. We’re agnostic. And the theories that being raised in a strong family are not proving as “threatening” to our future generations.

Posted by: Honest at April 12, 2007 10:10 PM
Comment #216303

Imus, made some bad comment no doubt about it, but at the same time, how many of the rappers have said some things that were not PC either. What happens to them nothing, but they still collect their money.

Now what I am waiting for is for Jackson and Sharpton, to go live an apologize to the Duke Lacrosse members for their comments they made before the full facts came out.

Posted by: KT at April 12, 2007 10:12 PM
Comment #216306

Yeah I agree that the american public is too soft now-a-days. What he said were just words. And frankly I didn’t see them to be that awful and degrading. That might be just because I am from the younger generation the basketball players were from.

The thing I hate is that Sharpton and Jackson feel that they get to judge whether or not someone has apologized enough. I frankly think that Imus should’ve kept his job. His show was based on the idea of picking fun at people.

I also agree with the idea that if a black radio DJ had said the exact same thing then it wouldn’t have been a big deal because “that’s how they talk” to eachother. But if a white guy says it then it’s wrong. Well if it wasn’t wrong for one race to say it then it isn’t racist.

Posted by: Brad Murphy at April 12, 2007 10:19 PM
Comment #216307

There is something about it that will be hard/impossible to eradicate.

“Everybody needs somebody to look down on,
If you can’t find somebody else then help youself to me”

Posted by: womanmarine at April 12, 2007 10:22 PM
Comment #216312
There are many more Imus’ to deal with as well.

Heh. I heard Sean Hannity today warning his radio audience that the liberal forces that took down Imus were going to turn on “right-thinking” talk show hosts next.

My take is that this whole thing was overblown — for a specific purpose.

Certainly, Imus owed the girls an apology, but I think the way Jackson and Sharpton went after him was more to send a message to the Democratic Party (and perhaps Sen. Obama in particular) as we kick off another Presidential campaign.

“Ignore us at your peril,” is what I heard.

Posted by: American Pundit at April 12, 2007 10:29 PM
Comment #216315

Obama - at this point - has the best chance to become president.
Why?
Because he comes from a family that still believes in the American dream and what it means to be an American.
Why?
Because he is second generation.
McCain comes in second .
Why?
His love for our country and his service to our country have been outweighed by his long public service - too much political baggage.

Our newest immigrants know more about being true americans than many of those that claim to represent us - and that goes for most of the big mouths spewing hate all over the media on a daily basis.
Why?
Because they have not been subjected to our history.
They have come to be AMERICANS - not hyphenated ones.

Posted by: Dawn at April 12, 2007 10:32 PM
Comment #216319

240 years ago a black man was considered 1/3 of a man.
140 years ago the 15th amendment guaranteed a black man the right to vote.
40 years ago the civil rights of blacks were recognized.

The wheels of progress turn slowly.
Too slowly for some.
What Imus said was dumb as a box of rocks.
That said, I respect Imus for the fact that he stepped up and said he was wrong, and didn’t side step the issue.
Would it be that Sharpton and Jackson could do the same thing.

Posted by: Rocky at April 12, 2007 10:53 PM
Comment #216323

Rocky,
You don’t think they would work themselves out of a job do you?
Even though it is exactly what they were supposed to do all along?
I don’t think they are following Martin Luther King in the way he really wanted, intended, or had planned.
Bill Cosby is a better representative for the blacks in America - and is -IMHO- closer to the way MLK wanted blacks represented and motivated.

Posted by: Dawn at April 12, 2007 11:00 PM
Comment #216330

Dawn,

People are the way they are. Being bigoted works both ways and isn’t illegal.
We expect more from more visible folks like Imus than we expect from ourselves.
I think it will be at least another generation before MLK’s “dream” will be realized.

As I said progress is slow, and if you push on some people it will only make it slower.

Posted by: Rocky at April 12, 2007 11:14 PM
Comment #216331

‘People are the way they are. Being bigoted works both ways and isn’t illegal. ….
….if you push on some people it will only make it slower.’

That’s right. That is what I’m saying.

This isn’t the only issue that is playing out this way.

Anyone who is hyphenated has been played. It goes to the top and right back down again - constantly.

Posted by: Dawn at April 12, 2007 11:21 PM
Comment #216334

I do not think Don Imus is racist, in a sense that most of us think of racists. I think he lacks a certain sensitivity that those who are the target of racism and sexism feel.

He doesn’t yet get that, or his comments haven’t reflected that. Jackson and Sharpton are immaterial here. They have injected themselves in a racial issue as they always do. What is different here are the people like Oprah and Della Reese voicing their digust with this dialogue, be it rap or comedy, or political rabble rousing.

What is different here, is these tactics will not be tolerated in the political or even social debate as they have been. Rush and his accolytes should be on notice.

I am hopeful that we could also include sexual orientation in this national discussion.

Posted by: gergle at April 12, 2007 11:29 PM
Comment #216342

Bigotry is as bigotry does. If a person of one race acts in a way that insults or denigrates another person based on their race, religion, ethnicity, gender, or color of their skin, that person is a bigot. It does not matter if the offense is taken by the targeted person or not. It does not matter if the targeted person suffers from the act or not.

The nation suffers from bigotry when it is tolerated to the point that it becomes so pervasive and accepted that no one notices anymore the harm that is done and experienced, especially by children whose parents or themselves are targeted.

Our nation needs to move toward civility out of respect not just for others, but, also out of respect for ourselves. One’s respect for oneself is flawed if it is built upon the degradation of others. One who is a bigot, is defensive about the same actions in reverse.

Why did the KKK fear blacks? Because if the Blacks ever decided to do to the KKK what the KKK had done to them, it was too fearful to contemplate. That is the self-fulfilling prophecy of bigotry and class discrimination. Every action of this kind, fears the equal and opposite reaction. It becomes self-fulfilling.

Some of the most abundant buyers of locks and security are those who have stolen, harmed, or exploited others. Just look at the sophisticated defensive measures and neighborhood networks the Mafia set up, or current drug cartels. Then look at the security of Mother Theresa by comparison despite the fact that she lived and worked among the poorest and those most in need.

Fear of one’s own motives turned against one drives many such defensive and security measures. America should not be a fearful nation. Nor, can America be the home of the brave if her people live in fear of others and each other.

If we end the hate and exploitation, we end a lot of the fear. And what is bravery but an unwillingness to yield to fear.

Posted by: David R. Remer at April 13, 2007 12:10 AM
Comment #216349

Imus crapped the bed. I think he was trying to be “in”. I’m white as the driven snow, nearly albino!

But, I was married to a woman of “mixed race”. I knew she had African American heritage, but very few did. Occasionally things would be said to set her hair on fire but not often.

Our daughter looks white, really white! Then her oldest son comes along………..and HOLY SHIT!

My grandson is as black as the ace of spades! The various responses throughout life have been totally hilarious. At the end of the day we need to be able to talk about “race’ just like we do hair color or eye color.

For crying out loud, we’re never going to get past the racial divide unless we all speak our minds. Racism can not survive the light of day!

I believe Imus was trying to use “in” Rap talk and it turned around and bit him in the arse. When I mess up like that my grandson bails me out.

I do the same for him. My daughter told him NO when he wanted to do “corn-rows” and within two weeks I had her saying YES.

Now, just how much racism is involved in our immigrant debate? Enough to give the “illegals” the moniker of “alien”? Rather sad isn’t it?

In my teens the “great divide” was between Catholic and Protestant where I lived. If it hadn’t been that it would have been something else.

We love to hate!

Posted by: KansasDem at April 13, 2007 12:47 AM
Comment #216350

Gergle, I don’t agree that anyone has been on notice here at all about what will “be tolerated.”

Imus should never have been on the air to begin with, but look for him to pop up an satellite radio within weeks—with probably a multi-million dollar contract.

In the meantime, rappers and comedians and other shock-jocks will continue to say what Imus did and worse every single day.

Posted by: Loyal Opposition at April 13, 2007 12:50 AM
Comment #216354

I’m glad Imus actually brought this to the attention of the public. I believe he was just trying to “act Black” perhaps to gain audience. Who knows?
I wish someone would ask the good Reverends Sharpton and Jackson if they had ever purchased a CD for their kids or grandkids containing references to women as ho’s or b——-s. I’d certainly like to hear their responses. Could anyone ask the lady Rutgers team members if they own any CD’s with references to women as such. Now, that would be good reporting, but it would certainly take some balls and the courage to be labeled a racist.
For a long time I have been wondering how women could possibly support Democrats who get over 95% of the African American vote, when this group of Democratic constituents so brazenly degrade women on an almost daily basis without any thought to it being questioned or criticized.
It is also my opinion that if an African American pro basketball player on ESPN’s Best Damn Sports Show had said the same thing, he would have had the audience and most of Black America laughing out loud. There is definitely a double standard here, but one that is not likely to change any time soon.

JD

Posted by: JD at April 13, 2007 01:45 AM
Comment #216357

LO,
What I said was, Rush and his accolytes SHOULD be on notice. They will use an undertone of racism against Barrack Obama, and Sexism against Hilary at the risk of their advertisers and ultimately their platforms.

As to rappers- their sexism is wearing thin.

Posted by: gergle at April 13, 2007 04:07 AM
Comment #216359

JD,

The Rutgers women did not choose to be in this. They were not public figures, in the classic sense. Attacking the victim is a typical racist and mysogynistic tactic. It is irrelevant what they have in their CD collection, as is the color of rape victims panties.

Also, Imus did not bring this to America’s attention, You Tube and the following outrage did.

As I stated before, Jesse Jackson and Sharpton are irrelevant side issues.

Posted by: gergle at April 13, 2007 05:13 AM
Comment #216365

Gergle

We just make too much of this sort of thing. I always say that it is better to be talked about than not talked about. The proper response form the team is, “Imus, who cares?”

I understand the general outrage as his comments. It is good that some people confront him on it. It is similar to the discipline we should put on Rosie, however. Point out how stupid the statement is and how the person has no standing to say it. Do not bring on the inquisition.

Posted by: Jack at April 13, 2007 08:02 AM
Comment #216369

Jack, with all due respect, you are tone deaf.

Rosie may be irrespnsible and stupid, but she is only attacking public figures, who many will argue deserve scorn. She will earn her reputation for her “thoughtful discourse”. No one of consequence thinks of her as a political heavy weight.

Imus attacked Non public figure college kids in a completely unprovoked and unconscionable manner for the sake of a punch line.

I am a fan of Imus. The girls at Rutgers obviously have no idea who Imus was or what his sense of humor is about. That doesn’t make his statements less hurtful and stupid. He was tone deaf, as many older white males are. They don’t get it. Times have changed. The plantation and club room jokes are no longer funny.

Posted by: gergle at April 13, 2007 08:36 AM
Comment #216371

Jack,

I failed to make my point. What you don’t get is that older white males aren’t going to be the ones who get to decide what is too much.

Empowerment means exactly that. They decide. Not you or I. Not the white board members at CBS or NBC. Not the T.V. icons. I may be too much to you, but you’ve not had to be, your entire life, the butt of the joke.

It wasn’t Jesse or Al that decided this. It was middle American blacks and women. They have arrived at a place where they are listened to. They no longer are riding in the back of the bus.
You may not agree or like the ride, but you aren’t driving this bus.

Posted by: gergle at April 13, 2007 08:45 AM
Comment #216384

Let’s not lose sight of something in our rush to judge Imus or any of the others mentioned above. We have a Constitution that guarantees the right of free speech. That means I must defend the right of any person to say things that I think are absolutely horrible. What Imus said was well beyond the limits of civil speech. It was thoughtless, hurtful, degrading, demeaning, and was not the least bit funny. However, he has the right to say such things, just as rappers, talk show hosts, or you and I have the same rights. What Imus said about the Rutgers players was wrong. He has acknowledged that. Time to move on and work on a society that is free of such stereotypes.

That said, is what Imus said so different from some of the posts here? We have read posts that go beyond the idea of critiquing the message and not the mesenger. We have seen our President(like him or not) called some very foul names. Other members of the administration have been called the same. We have read posts that not only demean but insult Democrats, liberals, progressives, etc. You get the idea. IMHO, if any of us have ever said or written any such words, then we have no right to criricize Imus, unles we are willing grant him the same rights we claim for ourselves.

Posted by: John Back at April 13, 2007 10:42 AM
Comment #216385

AP:

“My take is that this whole thing was overblown — for a specific purpose.

Certainly, Imus owed the girls an apology, but I think the way Jackson and Sharpton went after him was more to send a message to the Democratic Party (and perhaps Sen. Obama in particular) as we kick off another Presidential campaign.”

Wish I would have said that.

JD:

“I wish someone would ask the good Reverends Sharpton and Jackson if they had ever purchased a CD for their kids or grandkids containing references to women as ho’s or b——-s. I’d certainly like to hear their responses.”

Priceless. But good luck getting a straight answer out of either of them.

gergle:

“As I stated before, Jesse Jackson and Sharpton are irrelevant side issues.”

Sorry, I have to disagree. They represent the broad region of hypocrisy of their leadership. Reflect if you will on Jackson’s famous “heimey town” comment. He appologized and expected to be forgiven and moved on. That comment, in my opinion, is far far far worse than Imus’. Because Jackson’s comment was said with malice in the course of a “serious” discussion. Imus made a poor attempt at a type of humor he is not well suited to. Sharpton, on the other hand, is the worst of them. I have witnessed a few of his off-camera speeches down south, and am shocked at the tone and verbage. He is a hypocrite of the first order whenever he even thinks about calling someone on a “racist” remark.

In all, AP got this right. This was way overblown.

Posted by: CHICHI at April 13, 2007 11:04 AM
Comment #216386

One curious note;

Lets compare the press that the Imus firing, or the death of Anna Nicole Smith is getting to the press that the death of Kurt Vonnegut is getting and we will see what the priorities of this country truly are.

Posted by: Rocky at April 13, 2007 11:08 AM
Comment #216401

Chi Chi:

To call Sharpton and Jackson leaders, you have to presume they have large followings, do they?

That White MSM props them up as “leaders” is suspicious to me.

Obama is a leader. Oprah is a leader. Sharpton and Jackson are opportunists.

Posted by: gergle at April 13, 2007 12:33 PM
Comment #216405
To call Sharpton and Jackson leaders, you have to presume they have large followings, do they?

They obviously have enough clout to utterly destroy a popular talk show host.

And that demonstration of power is only going unnoticed by the mainstream media and the genenral public.

Posted by: American Pundit at April 13, 2007 12:46 PM
Comment #216409

Look folks, this is far from the first time that Don Imus has made these kind of comments. There’s a long list of them to choose from, because he’s been a misogynist, racist, gay-bashing assh*le during his entire career. The companies that have supported him should have pulled the plug and made him dissappear from the airwaves a long, long time ago. Just like Rush, Ann KKKoulter, et al, these people offer nothing of real substance to the American debate, just hatred, disrespect, purposeful rudeness, and assorted slurs.
Some idiots who think that crap is enjoyable will continue to stupidly support these talentless hacks making a career out of a lack of common decency, but unfortunately for them, eventually the simpleminded idiocy, baselessness and childishness of it all is bound to add up.
This time around, Don Imus attacked a bunch of women who are college basketball players, not for how they played — but because they’re black women — and to him, women and black people in general are always automatic targets for a nasty comment. This time around, it just so happened to be a double whammy because he revealed his racism and his misogyny with a three word slur.
Oh well, too bad for you Don Imus, you’ve finally been fired after all these years for being an Attack-Assh*le. Boo hoo hoo. No doubt he’ll get another gig eventually and his First Amendment rights to be a angry and hate-filled old man will be upheld.

Rocky:

Lets compare the press that the Imus firing, or the death of Anna Nicole Smith is getting to the press that the death of Kurt Vonnegut is getting and we will see what the priorities of this country truly are.

Excellent point, Rocky. Vonnegut was a great American, and will always be a National Treasure. Rest in Peace, Kurt Vonnegut, and thanks for all you wrote, and said, and did.

Posted by: Adrienne at April 13, 2007 01:01 PM
Comment #216412

Dawn,

This is not a freedom of speech issue at all. This paradox exists because we do have freedom of speech. Imus was free to say what he pleased, listeners were free to protest what he had to say, advertisers were free to stop sponsoring him, and CBS was free to fire him. The same thing is true with rap music, but there has to be some sort of backlash to get the ball rolling. I don’t see that happening anytime soon.

Posted by: Wisdom in Faith at April 13, 2007 01:34 PM
Comment #216414

Wisely stated Wisdom in Faith, except for the backlash to get the ball rolling part. I think the ball just started down hill and a great many public figures with a lick of sense are reevaluating their public image and future propensities.

Posted by: David R. Remer at April 13, 2007 01:59 PM
Comment #216415

AP,

To call Sharpton and Jackson leaders, you have to presume they have large followings, do they?

They obviously have enough clout to utterly destroy a popular talk show host.

Actually, NBC clearly said it had largely to do with internal black employees expressing outrage, and CBS ,while meeting with Sharpton and Jackson did not say that was the tipping point for them. Maybe they are lying, but why do you presume that?

Posted by: gergle at April 13, 2007 02:03 PM
Comment #216416

David:

Outstanding article. Very discerning.

I never heard of Imus before, but I’ve learned now that he tends to be on the liberal side. Maybe it’s time to look at harsh-talking so-called conservatives, some of whom you list.

Let’s start with Rush Limbaugh.

Posted by: Paul Siegel at April 13, 2007 02:14 PM
Comment #216420

Instead of seeing this as any reason for others to take notice, you need to consider how unusual the combination of circumstances are that led to Imus’s downfall.

Unlike other controversial figures (i.e. Michael Moore, Limbaugh, Anne Coutler, Howard Stern, etc) he is somebody who was extraordinarily vulnerable to this kind of thing because of his venue and the nature of his fan-base.

MSNBC and CBS are two giant mainstream media organizations supported by giant mainstream advertisers. Ultimately, the reason for his firing was money—the pulling of ad revenue.

Jackson and Sharpton are experts at stirring this kind of controversy and putting pressure on the big mainstream organizations, and they’ve done it many times before. But it simply would never work with the likes of say, Limbaugh, whose media presence is not based on the same business model as Imus’s was.

There’s also the nature of Imus’s fans—mostly white, male, and poltically independent or soft-core Democrats. Not the type who would or could rise up and defend him against an assualt the likes of which Sharpton mounted—and especially not over racially-charged remarks. Such people are not as politically organized or vocal as either the right or the left.

When Imus follows Howard Stern to satellite radio, as he’s likely to do, he’ll be able to say pretty much anything he wants to with impunity and there won’t be a thing the likes of Sharpton can do about it. Frankly, I don’t know how how Imus survived on MSNBC and CBS as long he did.

Posted by: Loyal Opposition at April 13, 2007 02:53 PM
Comment #216421

gergle:

“To call Sharpton and Jackson leaders, you have to presume they have large followings, do they?”

Unfortunately, I am afraid they do. However misguided, these two have found a way to keep their names and cashflows prominent. It stretches all the way back to the MLK days, when they both managed even to get their pictures taken on the balcony shortly after the shooting. I agree with you completely that they are opportunists in the worst degree.

Adrienne:

“This time around, Don Imus attacked a bunch of women who…”

I think attacked is strong for what occurred. If you watch the video, what he said was a horribly failed attempt at misguided street humor for which he and his personality are very ill-suited. It was a ridiculous attempt at mimickry and satire. But “attack”…I think that’s too strong.

Wisdom in Faith:

“This is not a freedom of speech issue at all.”

You are correct, and thank God for it. If this had degraded into an even more ridiculous first amendment arguement, complete with the ACLU, it could have set race relations back another 10 years.

Paul Siegel:

“Maybe it’s time to look at harsh-talking so-called conservatives, some of whom you list.

Let’s start with Rush Limbaugh.”

Boy, if this discussion starts, I want in.

Posted by: Chi Chi at April 13, 2007 03:06 PM
Comment #216422

After following this issue for a while, and NOT as an Imus listener, my impression of the Imus firings is that the companies fired him because that most to be feared thing started to happen. The Sponsors had started to bail out. No censorship, just a corporate sponsor’s decision that they didn’t want to be associated with this fool any longer. This is the thing that will get a show ended faster than anything I know.

Posted by: Richard at April 13, 2007 03:10 PM
Comment #216423

Actually Paul, Imus is a registered Republican, but voted for Kerry in the last election. I’ll be brave, state my beliefs, then suffer the consequences.
I’ve followed Imus off and on since the 60’s & at that time he was well into his addictions and was far more outspoken and outrageous than he has recently become. Through all of his struggles and ultimate “recovery”….(18 years clean and sober) he stood many times and fought for the underdog. The Imus Ranch for Kids with Cancer is his most impressive achievement. He has spearheaded many other fundraising efforts, pressured Santori to run the bill on autism research and funding, helped to raise the final 10 million dollars for the Intrepid Heroes hospital facility (donating 1/4 million $ personally) and his wife has her own interests in children and has funded a hospital in New Jersey that is completely “green”, hence, her own http://www.imusranchfoods.com/ “Greening and Cleaning” line of products.
None of this excuses his totally inappropriate and crass statement he made regarding the girls on the team, but I just personally think it was blown totally out of proportion and a few people found an opening to flaunt personal goals. Sharpton and Jackson and not necessarily pillars of the community.

Posted by: Sandra Davidson at April 13, 2007 03:10 PM
Comment #216424

LO,

Imus has been in radio since 1966, and is in his 60s. The radio show “Imus in the morning” has been on the air on CBS radio since 1979.

I’m thinking that he will probably hang up his spurs and retire.

Posted by: Rocky at April 13, 2007 03:13 PM
Comment #216429

Sandra Davidson said: “None of this excuses his totally inappropriate and crass statement he made regarding the girls on the team, but I just personally think it was blown totally out of proportion and a few people found an opening to flaunt personal goals.”

I take it then you would also have said the same thing of the Boston Tea Party. I mean throwing a private companies stock into the sea because the King would not relent on taxes was a bit overblown don’t you think?

Seminal and symbolic events such as these almost always take an inordinate toll on the person, company, entity being made an example of. But, it is often necessary for that to occur for change to take place. Viewed that way, the reaction to Imus is not overblown. His comments quite accidentally occurred at the right time and right venue to be made an example of. Imus had committed this same offense many times before, and paid no price. This time he has.

It is always thus for those would game the system inappropriately. Eventually, the inappropriate act is held accountable as is the misfortunate person who happened by chance of time, to be the one on that day at that moment to have committed it.

Many other companies acted as Enron did. Enron got left holding the bag. Any of the companies gaming the consumer caught and punished for it, would have been appropriate and NOT overblown. To say that because others commit a wrong, this person who committed it should not be made an example of, is illogical. It is how social events and justice occur. It is neither right nor wrong, it just is. It is neither overblown or underblown, it is a social phenomenon which is a part of life like our Sun or ocean waves.

Posted by: David R. Remer at April 13, 2007 03:47 PM
Comment #216430

Back to that truly amazing thing for a minute.

I am not surprised with all of the righteous indignation displayed here.

All of us are pure as the driven snow right?

I am also sure that unlike Mr. Imus, none of us has ever said anything inappropriate.

Imus was wrong, and he is paying the ultimate price for being wrong.

Posted by: Rocky at April 13, 2007 03:48 PM
Comment #216431

ChiChi:

I think attacked is strong for what occurred. If you watch the video, what he said was a horribly failed attempt at misguided street humor for which he and his personality are very ill-suited. It was a ridiculous attempt at mimickry and satire. But “attack”…I think that’s too strong.

It might be called a humorous, ridiculous attempt at mimickry or satire had it been said by someone else who isn’t known for misogyny, racism and homophobia, but Imus has too long a history. So, I’ll stand on what I said, ChiChi.
From Wikipedia, here are some other things that Imus has said over the years:

Imus and his crew, Charles McCord and Bernard McGuirk, have been repeatedly accused of racism, misogyny, homophobia and anti-semitism. For example, Imus and his cohorts referred to African American sports columnist Bill Rhoden as a “New York Times quota hire”and PBS anchor Gwen Ifill as a “cleaning lady” over twenty years ago.

Imus has repeatedly referred to Arabs as “ragheads.” He has berated many female newsreaders, most recently Contessa Brewer, which caused her to leave the show. After she left the show, Imus went on a tirade, saying, “With that fat ass she’s got, she wouldn’t be one of ‘em,” [a beautiful woman]. Imus said on the air, “That skank has to spend three hours with makeup in the morning.” The tirade was also tied to comments that were overheard of Contessa’s calling Imus “a cantankerous old fool” at a dinner in a restaurant in 2005, when she was still newsreader. During Imus’s show a producer also poked fun at poet Maya Angelou.

As reported by New York Times columnist Bob Herbert, in the course of a 1998 interview with Mike Wallace on the CBS News 60 Minutes program, Imus admitted telling a producer off-camera that McGuirk was hired to perform “nigger jokes.”

On his December 15, 2004, show, Imus referred to publishers Simon & Schuster as “thieving Jews”, and later in the show issued a mock apology, saying the phrase was “redundant”. In October 1998 he described media critic Howard Kurtz as “that boner-nosed … beanie-wearing little Jew boy” .

Imus’ routines were full of gay epithets, including “faggot”, “lesbo”, and various terms for gay sex.

Large enough to rate it’s own separate page, and again from Wikipedia:
List of controversial Don Imus quotes on women and minorities.

Posted by: Adrienne at April 13, 2007 03:49 PM
Comment #216432

Chi Chi, you overlook the merits that make Sharpton and Jackson leaders. They represent the views of a segment of our population. They don’t instill those views in that population, they reflect them. It is a free society we live in. Folks like Sharpton and Jackson don’t have little brainwashing Abu Ghraib’s to which they take their constituents for indoctrination.

Posted by: David R. Remer at April 13, 2007 03:50 PM
Comment #216433

Paul Siegal, thanks, and yes, Limbaugh should be sweating and next in line.

Posted by: David R. Remer at April 13, 2007 03:51 PM
Comment #216434

Adrienne:

Granted, he has a history of blunders, ill fated jokes, poor timing, foul language, racial and gender related epithets, etc.

But, again, listen to the tape. This particular instance was a simple poor attempt at humor. I am no fan of Imus. And it kind of bugs me to back down some of the detractors. But I think the truth here is much less than what the MSM is making it out to be. The MSM has been waiting like a cat in the bushes for just such a miscue by Imus to drum him out. That is Imus’ fault, given his past that you have adeptly pointed out.

I will make no excuses for his past behavior, but if you really wanted to get rid of him “for cause,” it seems to me there were plenty of opportunities in his past. This one is not appropriate. The words on their face may be an attack, but when put in the context of his “routines” as Wikipedia puts it, it is much less so.

Look, the truth is that Imus probably is a bigot and probably is a sexist. But kick his butt out of town for a good cause at an appropriate time. Don’t make him the martyr.

Posted by: Chi Chi at April 13, 2007 04:00 PM
Comment #216437

David:

Come on David. They only reflect those they lead? I think that is a bit naive, with all due respect.

These guys make their living, name and reputation on conflict. They are no better than the Limbaughs and Hannitys of the world. If all is calm, they are out of a job. They reflect? No, I think they prey and instigate in the most selfserving fashion possible. They find the soft underbelly of society and fan the flames in order to maintain conflict.

You are right. This is a free society. They do have first amendment rights just like everyone else. But they do not need the Abu Ghraibs to brainwash and indoctrinate. Unfortunately, the societal norms of those they “lead” do that for them. And the Ted Kennedys of the world propogate their dependency on people like Sharpton as a crutch. If there is no one to fight for, the knights lose their job.

Posted by: Chi Chi at April 13, 2007 04:12 PM
Comment #216439

ChiChi, I feel that it is beyond ridiculous to try to make Imus out as some kind of a martyr at this late stage. I truly feel his comments about these young black women college student athletes was simply the straw that broke the camels back for the black community. They’ve taken plenty from him over the years (and so have many other groups) and never called for his firing this way — but when it comes to young people who have a right to be extremely proud of their achievements, not attacked for their looks (“nappy-headed”) or baselessly smeared due to stereotyped prejudice and misogyny (“hos”), Black America finally felt the need to draw the line.
I say more power to them. An apology coming from Imus because he feared for his job, doesn’t mean squat.

Posted by: Adrienne at April 13, 2007 04:24 PM
Comment #216441

Adrienne:

Clearly, our disagreement is only a matter of degree, not in principle.

Clowns like Imus should not be on the air. But once they are, all I am saying, is dismiss them at the appropriate time. If looked at objectively, this particular instance was not the appropriate time. There have been many in the past…this was not it.

Posted by: Chi Chi at April 13, 2007 04:35 PM
Comment #216443

It’s true that Al Sharpton and Jessse Jackson represent the views of a segment of the African American community (though by no means all).

The problem is that as leaders of the Black community, those two are everything and more than any Grand Wizard of the KKK could hope for in his wildest dreams.

Sharpton, who literally has bloods on his hands for racist incitement, and “hymie-town” Jackson have no moral authority whatsoever to be taking the lead in attempts to punish someone for poorly considered humor.

Imus made an idiotic joke at the expense of people he then apologized profusely to. And they have since accepted his apology. That’s the way to handle these things when they come up, and that should be the end of it if we want to promote racial healing instead of stir up even more racial resentment, which is all any of this has achieved.

Whatever satisfaction some might get out of seeing Imus punished, the way it played out sows the seeds of more, not less, racial conflict.

Posted by: Loyal Opposition at April 13, 2007 04:44 PM
Comment #216444

Well Chi Chi, I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree. I’m getting the feeling that the only reason you don’t think this was the “appropriate time” is because you’re not black, and you’re not a woman being called a whore for no apparent reason, and your not being stupidly judged for your looks for any other reason than the fact that Imus thought the other girls team “looked cute” and therefore didn’t want your sports team to win a game.

Posted by: Adrienne at April 13, 2007 04:45 PM
Comment #216448

Ah yes Adrienne, you feel their pain don’t you.
Some, I wonder who?, can call a woman a “nutcase tranny whore,” but heaven forbid if somebody calls a woman “a nappy headed ho.”

Imus wasn’t fired because he said “nappy headed ho’s.”
He was fired because he is white and said it.

Double standards like that are why this type of crap is always going to be around.

Posted by: kctim at April 13, 2007 05:17 PM
Comment #216449

Chi Chi said: “These guys make their living, name and reputation on conflict.”

And their constituents live the conflict. That is the fundamental truth as to why they are the leaders of their constituents. They represent the conflict their constituents live through.

Posted by: David R. Remer at April 13, 2007 05:17 PM
Comment #216450

Chi Chi said: “But they [Sharpton and Jackson] do not need the Abu Ghraibs to brainwash and indoctrinate. Unfortunately, the societal norms of those they “lead” do that for them.”

Sounds like a pretty racist/class bigoted remark to me.

You are saying the societal norms of black supporters brainwash and indoctrinate those black supporters to follow Jackson’s and Sharpton’s lead. Do you know the meaning of a tautology? If not, look it up. No wonder you are trying to defend Imus.

Posted by: David R. Remer at April 13, 2007 05:21 PM
Comment #216452

kctim, the logic of your argument implies Imus should not have been sanctioned because others do what he does. ILLOGICAL. By that failure of reasoning we should not prosecute murderers because some others get away with their crime.

ILLOGICAL.

Posted by: David R. Remer at April 13, 2007 05:23 PM
Comment #216453

LO said: “Whatever satisfaction some might get out of seeing Imus punished, the way it played out sows the seeds of more, not less, racial conflict.”

You may be right. There is nothing preventing us from taking an alternate and far superior course though, except ourselves. We can choose to elicit the best from each other, or continue to elicit the worst from each other. America is as her people do. That’s why America is not yet as great as her potential and Declaration of Independence would permit.

Posted by: David R. Remer at April 13, 2007 05:27 PM
Comment #216455

No David. My argument is that unless we get rid of the double standard, the problem is not going to go away.

If what he said was so bad and people don’t want to hear it anymore, then everybody else who says it have to also be held accountable or the problem is not going to go away. You don’t punish one child while you let the other one get away with it IF you want that behavior to stop.

Imus wasn’t fired because of the words he said, he was fired because of the color of his skin.
The only thing ILLOGICAL has been all this talk about how it is what Imus said. If it was the words, then Rock, Tucker and other personalities would be out of jobs also.

Posted by: kctim at April 13, 2007 05:38 PM
Comment #216456

kctim:
“Ah yes Adrienne, you feel their pain don’t you.”

Well, I’m not black, but I am a woman, so yes.

“Some, I wonder who?, can call a woman a “nutcase tranny whore,””

Yes, that was me. I said it about KKKoulter who has made a career out of her total lack of human decency, therefore, she deserves exactly the same kind of name-calling she dishes out daily. Same goes for Rush that fat, lying drug addicted moron, or Imus, that horror-movie scary, shrivelled up old bigotted chauvinist. You see, a bully doesn’t deserve any respect, all they deserve is to get the same treatment turned on them that they’ve made a trade out of for a “career.”

“but heaven forbid if somebody calls a woman “a nappy headed ho.””

What did those girls do to deserve that? Nothing.

“Imus wasn’t fired because he said “nappy headed ho’s.””

Yeah, he was.

“He was fired because he is white and said it.”

Nope, he was fired because he said one racially ugly thing too many, and as a result, the media company and all the sponsors of his show pulled the plug. Good riddance to bad rubbish.

“Double standards like that are why this type of crap is always going to be around.”

Don’t make me laugh.

Posted by: Adrienne at April 13, 2007 05:38 PM
Comment #216457

Adrienne, whoops, i mean queen of sheba.


” he’s been a misogynist, racist, gay-bashing assh*le during his entire career ”

don’t hold back. tell us how you really feel.


Just like Rush, Ann KKKoulter, et al, these people offer nothing of real substance to the American debate, just hatred, disrespect, purposeful rudeness, and assorted slurs.

first i wouldn’t put rush in the same pigeonhole as ann kkkoulter. you just don’t agree with his analysis of the political world. you seem to show the same disrespect for those you disagree with. just an observation on my part though. whether you like imus or hate him, the main reason he was cancelled was the pressure applied by the REVEREND JACKSON AND CO. if he’s not a race bating biggot, i don’t know who is. once again two different people, two different standards.


Sandra

i agree what he said was completely out of line. with out the pressure by jackson and co. there’s a good chance he’d have been off the air via loss of advertising revenue, or loss of listenership. i think the market should have decided his fate, not the typical talking heads. you also pointed out the many worthy things he’s done. the fact you brought that up shows objectivity and character on your part. good job. i don’t expect any of the media or those who dislike him to be fair and point that out though. just for the record, i never listened much to him, but believe he deserves the same opportunity to redeem himself just like anyone else.


Posted by: dbs at April 13, 2007 05:44 PM
Comment #216458

David, “eliciting the best from each other,” in this case would have been to allow the involved parties to sort this out for themselves without a lot of grandstanding from media-seeking blow-hards. One blow hard (in Imus) was quite enough, thank you.

Let Imus talk (as he wished to) to the Rutgers players, and if they wanted more punishment meted out after an apology, let them say so.

As it happened, they forgave him. That could have been a fitting and graceful conclusion to the matter which would have caused everyone to stop and think about race relations and racial reconcilliation.

Of course, it’s likely that Imus would have only been motivated to apologize to save his job, but that would have been far better than tossing into the mix additional people with questionable motivations of their own (not to mention very poor records in this area. which makes their outrage smack of rank hypocricy).

Posted by: Loyal Opposition at April 13, 2007 05:46 PM
Comment #216463

dbs:
“first i wouldn’t put rush in the same pigeonhole as ann kkkoulter.”

I would.

“you seem to show the same disrespect for those you disagree with. just an observation on my part though.”

No, my disrespect is carefully focused and extremely warranted. The real problem is, some on the right of have grown to expect liberals to be perpetually weak and wimpy in the face of all this endless smearing and hatred directed our way. Well, some of us are no longer willing to oblige this distorted image of liberals-as-doormats. In this Rovian landscape we’ve found ourselves in, rightwing bullies should now be prepared to get back an equal amount of whatever they’re dishing.

“whether you like imus or hate him, the main reason he was cancelled was the pressure applied”

The pressure was effective, but it was the media corporation and the sponsoring companies that ultimately pulled the plug.

“by the REVEREND JACKSON AND CO. if he’s not a race bating biggot, i don’t know who is. once again two different people, two different standards.”

Rev. Jackson made one comment, on one occasion apologized and has never said anything close to that again. Imus, KKKoulter, Rush and Co. have built their whole careers out of their various hatreds and prejudices. Seems to me that the standards on the right are a great deal lower than those on the left.

Posted by: Adrienne at April 13, 2007 06:24 PM
Comment #216464

LO, the issue is a national one. Have you read not a word of understanding that racism and classism is still a huge problem in America? No, it should NOT have been a private matter between Imus and the Ladies. Imus made his remarks in a public forum reaching millions of people. It demanded a public response and our media is the public voice or have you forgotten the 1st Amendment and what it implies for the media?

Posted by: David R. Remer at April 13, 2007 06:32 PM
Comment #216466

dbs, actually it was the NYTimes article that was the turning point in this becoming a public hot topic. Not Sharpton and Jackson. There were a very large number of groups of people who responded after the NYTimes article, on the internet, in social and political organizations, and in Black community organizations.

Sharpton and Jackson just joined an already growing chorus which hadn’t achieved critical mass in the TV media yet.

Posted by: David R. Remer at April 13, 2007 06:36 PM
Comment #216467

kctim said: “If what he said was so bad and people don’t want to hear it anymore, then everybody else who says it have to also be held accountable or the problem is not going to go away.”

I agree. Watch Keith Olbermann tonight on MSNBC, he is doing a thing on Hip-Hop-crisy. You are right, others must be held to account as well. And all signs point to that taking place as we speak.

Posted by: David R. Remer at April 13, 2007 06:39 PM
Comment #216468

kctim said: “Imus wasn’t fired because of the words he said, he was fired because of the color of his skin.”

That’s pure race baiting bigotry in my opinion. He was fired because his show was no longer going to be profitable. It was a business decision forced by advertisers recognizing their liability in continuing to fund his show. The CEO of MSNBC said his decision was based on the revulsion by employees within his own organization. But, as CEO, he could not ignore the advertisers either. That is obvious prima facia.

Posted by: David R. Remer at April 13, 2007 06:42 PM
Comment #216470

kctim said: “The only thing ILLOGICAL has been all this talk about how it is what Imus said. If it was the words, then Rock, Tucker and other personalities would be out of jobs also.”

That is absurd on its face because Rush Limbaugh still has his own show. His denigrating remarks toward women have not resulted in the loss of his show, yet. Therefore, the color of speakers skin is not the deciding factor in what got Imus canned. It was his remarks, and the reaction they caused that caused him to be canned.

I am sure that if Bill Cosby had a daily TV and radio show with the audience the size of Imus’, and had said “them suited white crackers in the White House have really flexed their political will in this country”, there would have been advertisers backing out of his show as well, not to mention a healthy Republican conservative Southern Baptist coalition backlash by folks like Jerry ‘Foulmouth’ Falwell.

Posted by: David R. Remer at April 13, 2007 06:49 PM
Comment #216471

Adrienne


“some on the right of have grown to expect liberals to be perpetually weak and wimpy in the face of all this endless smearing and hatred directed our way.”

funny i’ve never seen these liberals. most that i’ve seen tend to use the very tactics you acuse the right of using.


“The pressure was effective, but it was the media corporation and the sponsoring companies that ultimately pulled the plug.”

yes because of the outcry by sharpton, jackson, and the usual race baters. he was cancelled because off PC politics, and nothing else.


“Rev. Jackson made one comment, on one occasion apologized and has never said anything close to that again.

no he just looks for targets of opportunity, and extorts them for anything he can get. i think his son got an extremely lucrative beer distributorship that way.

“Imus, KKKoulter, Rush and Co. have built their whole careers out of their various hatreds and prejudices.”

once again coulters remarks at times are out of line. i think i’ve said this before. rush on the other hand backs up his disageement with the left with valid points. you may not agree with them but he’s no ann coulter. i don’t believe he’s said anything completely off the hook. he just pokes fun at the left. i’de have to say many of the remarks regaurding those on the right here on this site have been far more offensive then anything he’s ever said on his radio show.

Posted by: dbs at April 13, 2007 06:52 PM
Comment #216474

I have no need for the media to tell when I am offended. Why such pressure of the sponsors by the left. What were they scared of, surely all Americans feel the same outrage as they. It was just a matter of time before Imus would be broke.

The only issue I see is the nanny state the liberals are setting up, being ran by a way too powerful liberal media.

I watched an episode of Family Guy where one scene showed God in bed with a girl trying to talk his way out having to use a condom. My response, as crazy as this might sound, was to turn the channel and not watch the show again. Where is the media outrage with this?

I hear people say they want Jackson and Sharpton to apologize in N.C.. While that point is valid, it only works into the pc playbook. I have eyes, I saw what transpired.

As far as conservative radio being next, that sounds like a dandy idea to let the left decide what I can listen to, since they can’t get an audience. I wonder how this thread would be different if a liberal or 3rd party guy had the most listened to show on the radio. I know one thing, I can say in all honesty and with clear conscious that I would not be talking about censorship. I don’t think Americans need to be told what to feel and how to live.

Posted by: andy at April 13, 2007 06:54 PM
Comment #216475

Andy, they aren’t being told what to feel, and how to live. They feel regardless of figure heads in the media. And they live the way they want. The media is a hit when it represents the interests which large numbers of people already feel or have interest in.

People are fascinated with sex, violence, and death. The media does not create sex, violence, and death. It reflects it, quite profitably too because that is what the people are fascinated by. You have the cart before the horse.

Posted by: David R. Remer at April 13, 2007 07:08 PM
Comment #216478

P.S. Andy, there is a liberal media out there. There too is a conservative media out there. Then there is a large cadre of journalists who do a very fine job of just reporting what is happening without bias one way or another. That is reality, despite partisans need to see conspiracy as the cause of their choosing a losing side in politics.

Liberals blamed the media for Republicans reign of failure. And Republicans continue to beat that dead horse of liberal media despite having created the greatest political bias the media has ever witnessed in the span of 16 years.

But the fact is, there is bias in both directions and most of us who want the facts are able to access them as they become available to the media. Whatever floats your boat.

Posted by: David R. Remer at April 13, 2007 07:13 PM
Comment #216479

David,

They’re not? Why was Imus cancelled? Because of a few elites (a few compared to his audience). Do you think his show would have stopped making money? While I have never listened to Imus he did have a fairly large market share. These people might have a different opinion than yourself.

Posted by: andy at April 13, 2007 07:17 PM
Comment #216481

Adrienne
I understand now. It is ok to say hateful things about somebody if they say something you disagree with but you can’t say something stupid if you are the wrong color or wrong sex. Gotcha!

David
If it would have been Chris Rock instead of Imus, under the exact same circumstances, there would have been no uproar and Rock would NOT have been fired.
Screaming race baiting or whatever does nothing to fix the double standard our society has when it comes to race.

Re: his job…I don’t object to his being fired one bit. The company should be allowed to hire and fire who they wish when they wish.
But, IF any one of those advertisers or companies ever sponsor a Chris Rock concert and he refers to women as bitches and ho’s, as he has in the past, then they are nothing but hypocrits.

Posted by: kctim at April 13, 2007 07:25 PM
Comment #216487

kctim:
“I understand now. It is ok to say hateful things about somebody if they say something you disagree with but you can’t say something stupid if you are the wrong color or wrong sex. Gotcha!”

No, you obviously don’t understand what I’ve been saying. I believe it is perfectly okay to say hateful things about people who have made a career out of saying hateful things. Imus says many stupid things about people of different races, and about women, and about gay people because he is a mean spirited, no talent shock-jock, rather than an entertaining and humorous radio personality. Therefore, he is fair game for equal amounts of the kind of denigration he gives, and, as we’ve just seen, for lots of political pressure that gets him drummed off of the airwaves.
People of all colors and both sexes can say stupid things, but repetitive displays of bigotry and prejudice isn’t okay, no matter who is doing it. I give a pass to Rev. Jackson because he said one thing, apologized and didn’t do it again — I would not be willing to forgive him had these incidents continued.
As far as I know, this is first time that Imus ever felt the need to apologize after his numerous displays of bigotry and prejudice, but that was only because he knew this time he might get canned. I don’t buy the sincerity of his apology at all — and I seriously doubt that the majority of other people do either.

Hope that clears things up for you.

Posted by: Adrienne at April 13, 2007 08:09 PM
Comment #216496

Chi Chi and ADrienne,

I do not feel that a large segment of blacks see Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton as their leaders.

They are quick to jump in front of a rising outrage. They make themselves available to the media and declare themselves spokesmen. I don’t really think they are.

Jesse may have the Bona Fides of being with MLK, but was even then accused of wiping his blood on his shirt for effect. I don’t know of any Bona Fides for Al.

As to Don Imus. I do not feel he is racist or mysogynistic. He is from a generation that is less attuned to these issues. His humor can be called sarcasm of these type of people, but it is subtle. If you do not know his shtick, you are not likely to understand that. The Rutgers women admit to not knowing who he is.

Imus does add thoughtful discourse to his program.

All that being said, a white guy making that statement isn’t funny and leaves an uncomfortable taste in everyones mouth. He should have known that. Poor target, poor joke.

As I said, the outrage was fueled by the You Tube video, which showed people, who do not watch Imus, a segment out of context. The reaction was genuine and visceral, not led by Jackson or Sharpton.

I think it is healthy that this debate is occuring, Imus is well enough off, and I will not weep for him. I hope it will spread to the hate mongers of right wing radio like Rush and Savage, as well as diminish the profiles of the likes of Coulter. Perhaps labels that use thuggery as a celebration and a profit center will be further questioned as to their motives.

Posted by: gergle at April 13, 2007 09:58 PM
Comment #216515

Remer,

The logic of kctim’s argument is that Imus was racially profiled.
If Imus can be racially profiled for entering into the neighborhood of commonality in Black communication, (which communication is his profession by the way), why then do Blacks complain when their teens are followed by the cops when entering into a predominantly white neighborhood? Imus tried to enter into the neighborhood of typical Black humor and communication and was stopped by the Black Police in Sharpton and Jackson.
If segregated communication is what Sharpton and Jackson want, why do they not accept segregation in other facets of public discourse? This is the same arrogant and condescending attitude that whites took before Jackie Robinson was allowed to play professional baseball. “Professional baseball is our (white) sport and Blacks need not try to imitate us!”
Imus made a complete misjudgement in trying to imitate the Black community, thinking he might be able to “break in” to their exclusive society, exclusive with the exception of Robin Williams who does his Black teen impression quite impressively. It is this attitude and hypocrisy that I believe many criticize Sharpton, Jackson, and others in the Black community for displaying.

JD

Posted by: JD at April 14, 2007 12:15 AM
Comment #216546

I didn’t read any of the above. My two cents is that I could care less, and does NO ONE? remember Jesse Jackson referring to New York city as Hymietown? WTF?

Posted by: Max at April 14, 2007 02:17 AM
Comment #216568

JD
Profiling? Interesting and maybe better way of thinking about it all. Thanks for giving me something to think about.

Max
If only everybody would “care less,” then bores like Imus, Sharpie and Jackson would be gone.
IMO, the outcome was the correct one. It was how and why we got to it that is wrong.

Posted by: kctim at April 14, 2007 12:23 PM
Comment #216600

JD, your argument has no merit whatsoever. Many other caucasion comedians have entered that territory on TV, radio, CD, movies, etc. Robin Williams and Dana something have been doing ethnic jokes for decades. Black comedians have been “cracker” routines for decades. This is not a case of one white person treading where the PC police say he didn’t belong.

What this was, was a snowball coming down a snow covered mountain. It got so big on its travel it now threatens the fabric of our society, and whites, blacks, jews, catholics, and muslims have reacted by saying enough is enough. This snowball must be stopped.

Posted by: David R. Remer at April 14, 2007 04:33 PM
Comment #216603

Weary Willie, that action you took with the kid and the joke, is precisely the kind of action this Imus event calls for. And, on a continuous basis by those who recognize the cumulative harm that has been done by racism and denigration of others based on nothing but the ability to be distinguished from other groups of people.

We as a people must not regress on the racism bigot issue. We as a people must continue to grow and mature on these issues as we have admirably done in many ways since the early half of the last century and before.

Posted by: David R. Remer at April 14, 2007 04:46 PM
Comment #216604

kctim said: “But, IF any one of those advertisers or companies ever sponsor a Chris Rock concert and he refers to women as bitches and ho’s, as he has in the past, then they are nothing but hypocrits.”

I couldn’t agree more, kctim. The maturing of America on this issue cannot occur in Congress, the Supreme Court, or the White House. That maturing must occur amongst the people as Weary Willie so eloquently alluded to. We can’t legislate attitudes. But, we can react without tolerance of negative ones, which is how our nation and her people can mature.

Posted by: David R. Remer at April 14, 2007 04:53 PM
Comment #216605

andy, the show immediately lost millions - the result of advertisers withdrawing from the show. The facts require no second guessing.

Posted by: David R. Remer at April 14, 2007 04:55 PM
Comment #216607

Oh come on David. Why did it take one or two weeks for the advertisers to leave? Why didn’t they leave in digust the next day? They were pressured by the left and the media. I’m sure some listners would have stopped listening, but from what I’ve heard it was his rough style of humor that kept them tuned in. He would have picked up listners thru the publicity, I was planning on tuning in just to see what all the fuss was about.
Hells bells man if you don’t like it don’t listen, the guy kissed Sharpton’s a** I say punishment enough. I admire your stance on racism, you seem sincere, but letting the goofy pc crowd set the rules only sets race relations back.

Posted by: andy at April 14, 2007 05:19 PM
Comment #216616

Remer,

What about the spiraling downhill trend to demonize and ridicule and mischaracterize Christians that has been going on since 1980 when Reagan won his election by uniting the solidly Christian right with moderate Christians on the left? Are we going to demand a stop to the slander of the Christian that is carried out even within this blog when religious issues arise as topics of discussion? Or, are Christians fair game? I am willing to bet the ultra-sensitive left will not hesitate to bash Christians as a group that is fair game to them. In fact, I believe there is an article on the left side of this blog equating the Robertson crowd with a Nazi-like army, though I haven’t read it thoroughly. Is that OK on the left, even though it specifically mentions, and attempts to degrade Pat Robertson? Just where will Watch Blog draw the line? Let’s have Watch Blog start the revolutionary wheel turning by banning such left-wing bigotry and hate speech shall we!

JD

Posted by: JD at April 14, 2007 08:23 PM
Comment #216634

Nobody should rally around Imus on the basis of the First Amendment. If anything, CBS and MSNBC are the ones exercising their rights of free speech and association here by declining to support and be indentified with Imus. Imus himself is still free to stand on a soap box in Central Park and say whatever he wants.

WW, where do you get this idea that free speech isn’t supposed to come with a price? Of course it should, and it does. I’m reminded of the Dixie Chicks controversy, where they screeched about the suppression of their right to free speech when in fact others were merely employing their own right to free speech in attacking them.

There’s no problem with Imus’s firing on legal grounds, and it’s good to have somebody like him (at least for now) off the air. The problem was the way it went down, with some of the most disgusting racists in our society leading the way with a nauseating display of hypocricy and self-righteousness.

Posted by: Loyal Opposition at April 14, 2007 11:11 PM
Comment #216638

David:

We can’t legislate attitudes. But, we can react without tolerance of negative ones, which is how our nation and her people can mature.

I couldn’t agree more.

It’s also important, however, that hypocricy and double-standards shouldn’t be the defining feature of our reactions against destructive attitudes.

For example, David Duke is not the person who should be taking the lead in attacking Louis Farrakhan, or vice versa. Al Sharpton should not be the one leading the public outcry over ANYBODY’S racist remarks.

And unfortunately, the African-American community in general has the moral authority to complain about racism, but none whatsoever when it comes to sexism and dehumanizing rhetoric about women, which three minutes exposure to rap music will amply reveal.

Posted by: Loyal Opposition at April 14, 2007 11:36 PM
Comment #216640

Weary Willie said: “Free speech is not suppose to come with a price.”

Man, I have to agree with L.O. on this one, Weary. Our freedom of speech America has come at a very, very high price over the centuries, and the price was blood, violence, and very expensive governmental and legal proceedings.

Anyone who has told 90 year old mother in law how beautiful they look knows deep down that freedom to speak the truth comes with all kinds of prices.

We all speak untruths to others, false flattery for example, to avoid the consequences of speaking freely and truthfully. It is commonplace and we call it civil and courteous.

To wake up next to your spouse and tell them their breath stinks has a price. It would be the truth. And if spoken, it would constitute free speech, but, here ‘free’ refers to the exercise, not the cost of speaking. The cost of speaking thus, could end up being weeks of buying flowers and trinkets to get back in the spouse’s good graces and warm embraces.

Posted by: David R. Remer at April 14, 2007 11:58 PM
Comment #216643

JD asked: “Are we going to demand a stop to the slander of the Christian that is carried out even within this blog when religious issues arise as topics of discussion?”

Hell NO! The day Christians decided to rule this country in their fashion by becoming embroiled in public politics and policy is the day they yielded themselves up for every manner of political criticism and accusations of serving other ends than their own religious observance.

The day the Christian Religion became the wealthiest single entity organization in the world was the day they subjected themselves to resistance of every kind by those who refuse to be influenced by such amassing of wealth and power.

Christians would do well to observe Christ’s words, ‘yield unto God that which is God’s and yield unto Ceasar that which is Ceasar’s’.

When Christians, regardless of color or denomination, attempt to force the province of God onto the state, to rule over all others, then Christians are as fair game for criticism and lambasting as the Communist, Socialist, Republican, or Democratic political parties.

Besides, I don’t think the poor little Christians have much to worry about. They are the vast majority in America. It’s the Christians in Iraq who may have a legitimate concern about being unfairly treated.

The other reason my answer is Hell NO is because of your characterization of criticism as slander. There is a world of difference between legitimate criticism and slander. It is not slander to criticize certain Christian groups of trying to use politics and government to enforce their values on others not of their ilk. That is a fair and just criticism based on facts.

It is not slander to point out the many hypocrisies of many Christian organizations. For example the anti-abortion pro-war Christians. That is not slander. That is just criticism. I suspect you are using the word slander to represent criticism, and that is not a fair representation of what takes place by and large toward Christians by non-practicing Christians in America.

Posted by: David R. Remer at April 15, 2007 12:11 AM
Comment #216644

LO said: “And unfortunately, the African-American community in general has the moral authority to complain about racism, but none whatsoever when it comes to sexism and dehumanizing rhetoric about women, which three minutes exposure to rap music will amply reveal.”

This is in and of itself a racist comment. Your comment above assumes ALL blacks are the same. There are a very large number of African Americans who DO NOT engage in gender slander and other dehumanizing forms of speech and action. But to say African American community has no moral authority to complain about sexism or dehumanizing rhetoric lumps them all into class to which they all do not belong. That is the fundamental root of racism and bigotry of every kind.

Just goes to show how pervasive racism is. Many folks engage in it without recognizing they are doing so. I believe that is what Imus was doing. I know that is what your comment quoted above is doing by its own words.

Posted by: David R. Remer at April 15, 2007 12:25 AM
Comment #216653
This is in and of itself a racist comment. Your comment above assumes ALL blacks are the same. There are a very large number of African Americans who DO NOT engage in gender slander and other dehumanizing forms of speech and action. But to say African American community has no moral authority to complain about sexism or dehumanizing rhetoric lumps them all into class to which they all do not belong. That is the fundamental root of racism and bigotry of every kind.

David, that is absurd.

Is it wrong to say that there is a problem with white racism in this country because not all whites are racists, and not all white engage in racist comments and behavior? At least there are large numbers of prominent whites who condemn racism, unlike what goes on in the African-American community whose leaders greet the horrifying degradation of women in rap lyrics with a deafening silence.

I did not say that all African Americans are the same when it comes to sexism. But it’s interesting to note that the word “ho” which landed Imus in so much hot water, is not only a creation but a staple of enormously popular African-American culture. You’ll hear that word a million times on our airwaves every day—from the mouths of African American entertainers.

My point is that this goes not only unchallenged by the likes of Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton and their followers, but is roundly celebrated and enriches those responsible. Hence, if they want to accuse racism—more power to them. But they have very little if any moral authority to to condem sexism when they ignore it so completely in their own ranks.

In any case, this illustrates my point perfectly. We’re going to make no advances in any of these areas so long as we allow the worst kinds of hypocrites to take the lead.

Posted by: Loyal Opposition at April 15, 2007 01:29 AM
Comment #216659

LO, you have been caught by the pc police. They have decided that you sir are in fact racist.

Why the hell are you on the defensive. The comment was not racist and it was a stupid accusation, why no anger the other way? I’m telling you, the day I’m bullied by this idiocy, well I’m not sure but it wouldn’t happen.

Posted by: andy at April 15, 2007 02:39 AM
Comment #216672

Racism is alive and well.
But it is a positivie sign that it is being discussed, and some are being held accountable.

While this ain’t illegal
________________
Imus: what he called Imus the women’s basketball team.

Limbaugh: “The government’s been taking care of [young blacks] their whole lives”

Boortz: Rep. McKinney “looks like a ghetto slut”

Boortz: Islam is a “deadly virus” and “we’re going to wait far too long to develop a vaccine to find a way to fight this”

CNN’s Beck to first-ever Muslim congressman: “What I feel like saying is, ‘Sir, prove to me that you are not working with our enemies’ “

Carlson: “[G]rouchy feminists with mustaches” control the Democratic Party
__________________
the employers and sponsors of these persons encourage it if they allow it.

MSNBC had a right to fire Imus (there goes his $10 million annual salary).
That wasn’t the first time for Imus.

Posted by: d.a.n at April 15, 2007 12:33 PM
Comment #216675

David,

Why is it that rap music and ‘ghetto slang’ keep black people down, yet country music and movies like joe dirt don’t make white people look all trashy?

I don’t think the problem is black media.

I think that it is still white society’s assumption that the majority of blacks lack ambition.

I think it is still the under the shudder white supremist mentality.

Why is it that white people commit 70% of the crimes punishable by death, yet 80% of death row is black?

I don’t think it is ‘hip hop’ culture that is ruining it at all.

I think it has been ruined and hasn’t improved as quickly as we think it has.

I think we said “mission accomplished” long before we finished.

This is probably why truely inspirational black people keep turning up dead, while Oprah and Al Sharpton will live well into thier hundreds.

Posted by: Bryan AJ Kennedy at April 15, 2007 12:48 PM
Comment #216696

Bryan, there are many psychological, socio-economic, and historical reasons why some people of any race bring shame upon themselves, and why others not of that race will attribute the entire race with the negative characteristics of some. Part of the problem is rooted in our 5 senses which function as evolutionary survival adaptations in allowing us to discriminate danger from safety and security. Being able to distinguish between one’s friends and family and strangers who may pose a threat is at the heart of all discrimination, bigotry, and racism.

Be that as it may, the American people have been struggling for over 300 years to move toward the fulfillment of the ideals in the Declaration of Independence, that all persons are equal and should be entitled to certain unalienable rights such as life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. As long as the American people continue that struggle toward those ideals, America can remain the shining light on the hill revealing the way for the rest of mankind. So great was the idealism of our founders and authors of the Declaration of Independence.

To the extent that our leaders and their supporters abandon those ideals through Abu Ghraib’s, Guantanamo’s, elective and unnecessary war, and pure lies to justify the exercise of lethal and greedy power, America’s light for mankind dims, making the light of other’s ideals, which could never shine so brightly, appear the brighter beacon.

These and more are the stakes on the table for the human race and the planet we live on. What we do here in America, how we live and act from our homeland, affects billions of people around the globe. America must assume that responsibility with increasing maturity, rationality, and solidarity or, the world will follow another’s lead; another, whose ideals are nowhere nearly so bright and promising, but far more pragmatic and expeditious, like China for example. And that won’t bode well for the human race, or our mother earth.

Posted by: David R. Remer at April 15, 2007 03:21 PM
Comment #216699

andy, your comment’s “let’s you and him fight” tactic is pathetic.

It was the content of LO’s comment that was criticized, not Loyal Opposition. Imus is a person who does many great and benevolent things for others and with his money, and his comments on his show regarding the Rutger’s team do not diminish the fact that he is a good person with a caring heart. The rebuke of his comments is just that, a rebuke of his comments, not of the man. Imus as a person is still praiseworthy.

Only children and adults lacking in maturity take criticism of a single action as condemnation of their entire being. Such immaturity is the cause of many problems in adults who fear their reality state of imperfection. One cannot grow and mature without the ability to accept critique and act positively on it, without losing one’s sense of self worth, but increasing it instead.

Posted by: David R. Remer at April 15, 2007 03:31 PM
Comment #216700

LO said: “In any case, this illustrates my point perfectly. We’re going to make no advances in any of these areas so long as we allow the worst kinds of hypocrites to take the lead.”

I agree, LO. We are responsible for our leaders, for without us, they have no followers. But, the truth be told, there are no perfect leaders. All leaders are imperfect, for all leaders are human. It is not just or appropriate to fail to acknowledge that our leaders have room to grow as well. Leaders are not born. They learn to be leaders and like all things learned, mistakes and failures are the best teacher when accompanied by perseverance to grow and improve.

Posted by: David R. Remer at April 15, 2007 03:38 PM
Comment #216731

Yes, but when that critique comes from the left you’re usually safe to accept the compliment and move on.

When does getting angry mean “lets fight”. There are other ways to express anger, I would think such an open minded person would know that. You called his opinion racist, so you decided that a small part of him was racist and put it in writing. Personally, I don’t feel the need to put qualifiers set on your terms in my responses to you. If you don’t agree then I know I’m doing something right.

Posted by: andy at April 15, 2007 09:40 PM
Comment #216734

NO, andy, once again you are not accurate. I called his “COMMENT” racist. Not his opinion. Which left room for the possibility that his words did not convey there intended meaning.

You see, a part of the problem with prejudice is failing to see what is actually said or done, but, instead hearing or seeing what one projects from their own experience as said or done. I said ‘comment’. You projected ‘opinion’. Thus, you did not receive the message I communicated, but instead received the one you expected to receive. You prejudged what I said instead of actually reading what I said. The proof is in your own word substituted for my actual word.

Prejudice always has this component of misunderstanding, and is difficult to get over because the party which misunderstood then goes off on the tangent of trying to defend their misunderstanding, rather than admitting their error.

Posted by: David R. Remer at April 15, 2007 10:37 PM
Comment #216736

I usually don’t make a habit of making comments that don’t reflect my opinion. You purposely misinterpreted the “comment” to use for your own agenda.

As far as the rest of your comment (or opinion), I have no reason to feel guilt. You may have sucess convincing others into this emotion, and if this is your calling I wish you the best.

Posted by: andy at April 15, 2007 11:18 PM
Comment #216749

NYTimes Liberal columnist Maureen Dowd on Clarence Thomas:
“It makes him crazy that people think he is where he is at because of his race, but he is where he is at because of his race… maybe he is disgusted with his own great ingratitude.”

RESULT- NO OUTRAGE OVER THIS

Howard Dean at a meeting of the DNC Black Caucus:
“Do you think the Republican National Committee could get this many people of color in a single room? … Only if they had the hotel staff in here.”

RESULT- NO OUTRAGE OVER THIS

NAACP President and Congressman Mfume about G.W. Bush’s African-American Cabinet members:
“When the ultra-conservative right-wing attacker has run out of attack strategy, he goes and gets someone that looks like you and me to continue the attacks.”

RESULT- NO OUTRAGE OVER THIS

NAACP Chairman Julian Bond paraphrased from a 2002 speech:
“and like the ventriloquist’s dummies, they sit there in the puppet master’s voice but we can see whose lips are moving, and we can hear his money talk.”

RESULT- NO OUTRAGE OVER THIS

Former Democratic Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney reportedly had this posted on her website about an opposing candidate:
“An Oreo Black candidate named Denise Majette emerged as lots of money poured from the coffers of the American Israeli Public Affairs Committee funded not only a hate campaign against McKinney, but in support of her opponent as well.”

RESULT- NO OUTRAGE OVER THIS

Nebraska Democratic Party Executive Director, Barry Rubin, posted a blog on the Democratic Party website referring to Republican candidate Carlos Castillo as “Tio Tomas” (Uncle Tom)

RESULT- NO OUTRAGE OVER THIS

Democratic Senator Robert Byrd used the phrase “white nigger” twice in one weekend on National TV

RESULT- NO OUTRAGE OVER THIS

Maryland State Democratic President Mike Miller Jr. called Republican Black candidate Michael Steele “Uncle Tom” in 2001.

RESULT- NO OUTRAGE OVER THIS

In a Maryland Lt. Governor debate with then Democratic Lt. Governor Kathleen Kennedy Townsend, Black Republican Michael Steele had oreo cookies thrown at him by Townsend supporters.

RESULT- NO OUTRAGE OVER THIS

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid on Italian Republican Senator Rick Santorum:
“Senator Santorum talk about reform is like having John Gotti talk about doing something about organized crime.”

RESULT- NO OUTRAGE OVER THIS

Tennessee Democratic State Representative Frank Buck about illegal immigrants:
“If they’re a wetback in this country illegally, they’re not going to have any identification… the reason they assume the risk of being a wetback is they do really good work.”

RESULT- NO OUTRAGE OVER THIS

Democratic Senator Joe Biden on Barak Obama:
“the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy.”

RESULT- NO OUTRAGE OVER THIS

Senator Biden again on Indian-Americans:
“In Delaware, the largest growth of population is Indian-Americans, moving from India. You cannot go to a 7/11 or a Dunkin’ Donuts unless you have a slight Indian accent. I’m not joking.”

RESULT- NO OUTRAGE OVER THIS

Hillary Clinton alleged to have called Paul Fray, Bill Clinton’s campaign manager in 1974 a “f—-ing Jewish bastard” after an unsuccessful campaign for Congress. Fray’s wife and businessman Neil McDonald are alleged to have heard this derogatory remark as well.

RESULT- NO OUTRAGE OVER THIS

Hillary Clinton on Mahatma Gandhi stating that Mahatma:
“ran a gas station down in St. Louis.”

RESULT- NO OUTRAGE OVER THIS

Dan Rather on the “Imus in the Morning” show after being asked by Imus why CBS News was ignoring the Chandra Levy / Gary Condit investigation:
“They (CBS officials) got the willies, they got the Buckwheats.”

RESULT- NO OUTRAGE OVER THIS

Double Standard? You decide!

JD

Posted by: JD at April 16, 2007 01:39 AM
Comment #216764

JD,
You mean the American people are quixotic and fickle? NO!!!! Say it ain’t so!!!

Posted by: gergle at April 16, 2007 09:34 AM
Comment #216774

Sorry I am so tardy with my responses. I was away for the weekend.

David R. Remer:

“Chi Chi said: “But they [Sharpton and Jackson] do not need the Abu Ghraibs to brainwash and indoctrinate. Unfortunately, the societal norms of those they “lead” do that for them.”

Sounds like a pretty racist/class bigoted remark to me.

You are saying the societal norms of black supporters brainwash and indoctrinate those black supporters to follow Jackson’s and Sharpton’s lead. Do you know the meaning of a tautology? If not, look it up. No wonder you are trying to defend Imus.”

Where to begin. Well, let’s start with “critique the message, not the messenger.” I know, you will claim to have done that, but the not so veiled implication is that I am bigoted and a class warrior. This, my friend, is laughable. You have drawn the conclusion you chose to draw to continue your over-analyzed arguement. My statement was not bigoted. It is simple reality. I spent this past weekend in the same places I spend many days in the last several years—actually getting my hands dirty helping those you seem to think I am bigoted against. I have seen the self-perpetuation and self-fulfilling prophecy up close and personal in Milwaukee (where a group of businessmen I associate with go to help with time, effort, sweat and large amounts of money), and in Biloxi, where that same group has attempted to break the perpetuation for at least a few families. David, you really need to spend more time first-person observing for extended periods of time, and listening to the very people you allege to defend and know so well. Your eyes will open quickly to see how Sharpton and Jackson’s view point fall on needy ears. Spend a little more time in modern inner-city minority neighborhoods to see the truth about how the “societal norms of black supporters brainwash and indoctrinate those black supporters to follow Jackson’s and Sharpton’s lead.” It is a reality whether you chose to believe it or continue with your highbrowed psychobabble. That kind of reasoning does these people absolutely no good. Role up your sleeves, David, and dig in. My friends and I have been blessed to not be in that bleak situation. We do not preach, scold or judge the way you seem to do of me. We help, instruct, teach, listen, build, and pay. I consider myself lucky to be in the position I am in. But I had advantages of “societal norms” that these people do not. I took advantage and applied some hard work, and now I pay back.

Your comments are offensive, whether it was the message or the messenger. Your message is one of blame and excuses.

I am a fiscal conservative who works his ass off for others…put that in your pipe and smoke it.

By the way David, I was not defending Imus. Reread my post for cying out loud.

Adrienne:

“Well Chi Chi, I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree. I’m getting the feeling that the only reason you don’t think this was the “appropriate time” is because you’re not black, and you’re not a woman being called a whore for no apparent reason, and your not being stupidly judged for your looks for any other reason than the fact that Imus thought the other girls team “looked cute” and therefore didn’t want your sports team to win a game.”

I have never, nor will I ever, accept this as an arguement. Because one is not a member of the affected group does not mean one can not empathize with that group. I would have thought you would have made a stronger arguement than this.

I have been called much worse things by much better people than Imus. Witness David R. Remer’s bigot accusation above. One can either prove it wrong, ignore it, or accept it as truth. In the case of the lady athletes, the statement on its face was obviously factually incorrect, without the need to answer. Emotionally, it was provoking. Hence, the answer. The actions of the team were completely appropriate and specifically targeted. An appology was clearly in order, even when the phrases were ripped completely from context. I am not defending Imus. I am criticizing the process and the timing.

Posted by: Chi Chi at April 16, 2007 10:27 AM
Comment #216816

Chi Chi, in all of my posts in this thread I’ve stated my arguments very plainly, not just in my responses to you. Now you seem to be choosing to focus on only my last comment, as you seem to think that this comment was the weakest, and therefore, the easiest to dismiss.
Personally, I am failing to see when for you the “appropriate time” would have ever come for a repeat-offending racist, misogynist and homophobe like Imus. Perhaps you could elaborate on the circumstances you would need to see to feel that the appropriate moment had at last arrived?
The way I see it, there could not have been a better moment, since he was attacking people who were not, and did not ask to become, public figures.

In the case of the lady athletes, the statement on its face was obviously factually incorrect, without the need to answer.
In my view the fact that it was obviously factually incorrect is EXACTLY the appropriate time to answer this crap at a national level, and see him pay a heavy price for it. A crystal clear moment where his utterly ingrained racism and misogyny was never more blatantly on display, and his power as an extremely well-paid narcisist/ public loudmouth made him think he could baselessly attack, and once more get away with it. Posted by: Adrienne at April 16, 2007 02:30 PM
Comment #216824

An interesting I-man quote.

Posted by: gergle at April 16, 2007 03:26 PM
Comment #216832

You mean the American people are quixotic and fickle?
Gergle


No, I mean the Democratic controlled MSM never ever responds or beats a Democrat into the ground when they say racially motivated inappropriate remarks. The Press wouldn’t want to manufacture public furor against a Democrat, now would they.
Let’s just ignore it, or no, let’s make up excuses just in case the public can’t ignore it.

There is more to this story than just Imus, as the blog post reads. This is about attacking and silencing certain individuals whom liberal leftists do not like. In my opinion, Imus was not ultra-conservative in his views at all, but one thing he did was point out the hyopocrisy and just plain stupid antics of the left. He also was one to criticize the network media on a regular basis. If you do this you can be assured their attack dogs will rip you to shreds as soon as they get the chance, while ignoring their own liberal friends who do the same thing, if not worse.

I see you didn’t even attempt to comment on the actual quotes of the left-wing bigots I listed above!

JD

Posted by: JD at April 16, 2007 03:57 PM
Comment #216844

Yes, Chi Chi, I have heard your argument before. In the 1950’s Whites in Detroit said it was just reality that Blacks were less intelligent too! ‘Just reality, not bigotry’.

Yes, we have heard that defense infinite times before.

Posted by: David R. Remer at April 16, 2007 04:37 PM
Comment #216847

JD, thank you for that list of Dem’s quotes and statements. I very much appreciate the effort you spent to collect and post it. And you are quite right. Race is political tool used by most politicians to gain advantage for themselves and against their opponents. It should stop.

The simple truth is, the way to minimize political racial bias is to stop acknowledging and using race to make any kind of argument, political, or otherwise, except to deal with discrimination based on race when it is evident. But, of course, that is not such a simple thing in America, at all, when one looks at how The Declaration of Independence, politics, and law are so integrally entwined.

Posted by: David R. Remer at April 16, 2007 04:45 PM
Comment #216850
Hands down, it is Black Americans who invent the ‘nappy headed ho’ gutter talk…

Although I don’t defend Imus’s or Black entertainer’s use of such language, I don’t think that Blacks invented this talk, but they have adopted it in defiance of the racist origins of such talk. It’s not clear why Imus was using such language. If he was attempting to be humorous or cool, he is stupid, since his use lacks the irony it betokens when Blacks use it. If he thought that merely using such language is funny, he is even stupider. Although shows such as South Park use equivalent language, it is in the context of social parody and rarely for pure sport.

Posted by: Mental Wimp at April 16, 2007 04:50 PM
Comment #216851
I was recently complimented for my “enlightenment” for mentoring three excellent black employees into higher level positions.

They did not require my benevolence to get ahead. I helped them in order to strengthen the organization.

Jack, you’re much more attractive without the smarmy self-congratulation.

Posted by: Mental Wimp at April 16, 2007 04:53 PM
Comment #216983

David R. Remer:

“Yes, Chi Chi, I have heard your argument before. In the 1950’s Whites in Detroit said it was just reality that Blacks were less intelligent too! ‘Just reality, not bigotry’.

Yes, we have heard that defense infinite times before.”

And what has it gotten you. Gee, Detroit sure has improved at the hands of psychobabble interests. Let’s analyze till the cows come home but do nothing to actually improve the situation. Talking about it is all well and good. But you need to talk to the people involved, not your overanalyzing peers. Actions are what count.

I am a realist and a seeker of truth, to be hokey. The truth is that, black, white, asian, native americans, etc. who are in this situation are stuck in a trap that they don’t know how to get out of because those they look up to are not helping them. All their selfrighteous “leaders” are doing pointing fingers. That may have served a purpose decades ago, but eventually you have to actually do something about the problem. Listen to the people in the trenches. Most we talk to aren’t spouting the high minded blog fodder you read here. They are saying, “We don’t have clean water or no water at all. We are living in rat infested housing. Our kids are failing out of school. Our kids are in jail. Our kids have nothing to do. And we don’t know what to do about it.”

Roll up you sleeves, get off the blog sites, put down your psychology blame books, and hit the streets. Actions speak louder than words.

Obviously, I am quite passionate about this. I invest a lot of time, money and emotion into this topic, and don’t waste time reading about it. My friends and I do this anonymously as individuals, not associated with any organization so we save the admin costs. We don’t see race, age, etc. when we work with these people. It doesn’t matter. People in need are people in need. People need to get motivated to do something for these people beyond holding hearings, having focus groups, doing polls, forming study committees, and giving inflamatory blame speeches.


Posted by: Chi Chi at April 17, 2007 08:35 AM
Comment #216992

JD,
You mean the MSM that made Howard Dean look like a loon by amplifying his yell at a rally, and playing it repeatedly? Damn Democrats.

Funny, I personnaly thought Imus was kind of progressive, but made fun of everyone. It was his shtik.


Posted by: gergle at April 17, 2007 09:50 AM
Comment #217083

Chi Chi,

But if they actually knew they could take advantage of, and enjoy the American system they wouldn’t be dependent on the government. Besides they are not smart enough, only a liberal mind knows whats best for minorities. From the experiences you stated how can you question the results so far?

Posted by: andy at April 17, 2007 02:59 PM
Comment #217105

Chi Chi, it is very, very positive and good that you are out in the trenches helping folks in need. But even the greatest of such folks like Mother Theresa, cannot change the human world unless the structure of the human world changes also. And that comes about through schools, government, and media.

The changes required to make the human world a better place can only be partially accomplished by the one on one assistance of benevolent benefactors and do gooders. Their valuable work must be complimented and augmented by policy changes that re-shape values, strengthen ideals, and lobby like hell the institutions which stand as obstacles to the people you are trying to help.

Don’t discount the writers, pundits, and debaters. As our society places an ever higher premium on specialists in all fields and higher education for ever increasing numbers, the lobbyists, writers, pundits, and debaters will be crucial to altering the structures that now act as impediments.

Assuming that because a person blogs, they aren’t contributing to helping folks, is a bit overreaching. Does being a Big Brother count? How about a counselor in a halfway house for federal prisoners? How about contributions to St. Joseph’s Indian School for the Lakota Sioux? How about an avid communicator to one’s representatives in Congress? You think you can change the world without the assistance of folks engaging in these kinds of activities? Communication is an integral part of improving anything in human affairs. Yet, you seem to be demeaning those who engage in it by your last comment. Odd thing to do.

Assumptions can reveal a lot.

Posted by: David R. Remer at April 17, 2007 04:42 PM
Comment #217184

C’mon Gergle. Dean made a bit of a fool of himself. Nobody should take himself so seriously that he gets that excited about himself.

But, be honest with me. Did you know that any of the above liberals had made these statements before I revealed them to you on this blog?

Be honest once more. Why do you think that is?

What would happen to a Republican if he wrote in the NY Times that Obama is where he is only because of his race?

What would happen to a Republican if he said Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton were ventriloquist dummies with Nancy Pelosi pulling the money strings on the back of their necks to make their mouths move?

What would happen to a Republican candidate if he had his constituents throw Oreos at the multi-racial Barak Obama during a Presidential debate?

What would happen to a Republican if he said we have to build a wall across the Rio Grande to make sure the wetbacks don’t get in?

What would happen to a Republican if he said that Barack Obama was the first African-American to be articulate, “clean”, and good-looking?

What would happen to a Republican if he called a Jewish campaign worker what Hillary alledgedly called Bill’s?

Now, if any of the readers of this blog answered that they were unaware of any of these remarks by Democrats, some of whom are Democratic Presidential candidates, I ask one last question:

What word did Republican Senator George Allen use that cost him his election in Virginia? I bet you don’t even have to look it up! I wonder why?

JD

Posted by: JD at April 17, 2007 09:12 PM
Comment #217204

what would’ve happened if a repub. had illegally obtained copies of the credit report of Micheal Steele’s credit report instead of a dem. ( I think Schumer). Like all the scenarios above, he would have been buried.

Has nothing to do with improving relations, it’s all about the agenda.

Posted by: andy at April 17, 2007 10:23 PM
Comment #217270

JD,

I was aware of most of the statements and there was some outrage on some of these. Most of these statements were heard on MSM. What killed Imus was YouTube and a stupid targeting of non-politicians.

Your interpretation of some of these statements is stretching your position. None of these people have a Radio/TV show with sponsers. I don’t believe you can manufacture the very real outrage that happened to Imus. Was there grandstanding? You Bet.

What happened is what happened. Fantasizing over hypotheticals is not particularly productive, unless you want to create a phoney scenario in your own mind.

Morons re-elected Jefferson in Lousiana. I can’t explain that, but then some people think Gingrich
is a great guy.

I’m sorry you don’t like reality, but I don’t think lecturing outraged peoeple will get your desired result. You are free to get outraged at whomever you please.

Next you’ll be telling us it’s a Jewish conspiracy. Your belief that Democrats run MSM is absurd, Fox drivel.

Posted by: gergle at April 18, 2007 09:41 AM
Comment #217318

Take the “put your research where your mouth is” challenge, Gergle.

Surf the net for any of the Democratic quotes I mention above and see how many, and for how long, the mainstream networks carried these stories. They shoved nearly every one of them under the rug of liberal bias.

Then, search the “macaca” incident with Senator George Allen and see the number of vicious hits Allen took in comparison to the Democrats by the news agencies that would be considered mainstream. The difference is astounding.

Then, come back and defend your position.

JD

Posted by: JD at April 18, 2007 03:12 PM
Comment #217325

David:

“Chi Chi, it is very, very positive and good that you are out in the trenches helping folks in need. But even the greatest of such folks like Mother Theresa, cannot change the human world unless the structure of the human world changes also. And that comes about through schools, government, and media.”

Correct. Take action. Talk about it to the extent that you identify the problem and take action to cure the ailment.

“The changes required to make the human world a better place can only be partially accomplished by the one on one assistance of benevolent benefactors and do gooders. Their valuable work must be complimented and augmented by policy changes that re-shape values, strengthen ideals, and lobby like hell the institutions which stand as obstacles to the people you are trying to help.”

You will not reshape most people’s values with policy changes. Institutions find ways around policy changes. One on one is irreplacable. If we continue to rely on our government to accomplish anything for those less fortunate, we may as well throw in the towel, regardless of which party is in power. Really, what significant improvement in people’s lives that is indisputable, and makes sense, has the government been responsible for?

“Don’t discount the writers, pundits, and debaters. As our society places an ever higher premium on specialists in all fields and higher education for ever increasing numbers, the lobbyists, writers, pundits, and debaters will be crucial to altering the structures that now act as impediments.”

I discount no one. But I will criticize and push to action those who spend too much time analyzing and not enough time acting.

“Assuming that because a person blogs, they aren’t contributing to helping folks, is a bit overreaching.”

I don’t know where you are getting this, but it wasn’t me who said it. I said those who spend all their time talking and analyzing are going to have alot of dead bodies at their feet.

“Does being a Big Brother count? How about a counselor in a halfway house for federal prisoners? How about contributions to St. Joseph’s Indian School for the Lakota Sioux? How about an avid communicator to one’s representatives in Congress?”

Again, where the hell did this come from, and what does it have to do with anything I said?
Big Brother? Yeah, I was one for 20 years. It is action, not blabbering. Couselor at a halfway house? Again, one on one action. Contrib to the Indian School? I’ve never heard of the school, but if it is a worthy cause I would support it. I have no problem with communicating with our congressman. Mine gets at least 1 e-mail from me a month. But if that is where it stops, it is just so much wasted cyberspace.

“You think you can change the world without the assistance of folks engaging in these kinds of activities?”

No. Absolutely not. Again, this is not even close to what I said. Not sure where you are getting this or coming from.

“Communication is an integral part of improving anything in human affairs. Yet, you seem to be demeaning those who engage in it by your last comment. Odd thing to do.”

Not even close David. I criticize those who think their think tanks and extreme over analyzing and studying will solve anything in and of itself. If we spent half the time and money we spend on studies on the actual problem, we would be way ahead.

“Assumptions can reveal a lot.”

Not worth a comment.


Posted by: Chi Chi at April 18, 2007 04:09 PM
Comment #217729

Chi Chi said: “You will not reshape most people’s values with policy changes.”

That’s simply not historically correct, Chi Chi. The 1965 Civil Rights Act changed people’s values. Yes, it took federal troops to enforce the policy and decades of people living with it, but, we don’t have young black men swinging from Cypress trees in the South anymore, nor internment camps for Muslims just because we are at war with an Islamic nation.

Policies do change people’s values. Just not quickly.

Chi Chi asked: “Again, where the hell did this come from, and what does it have to do with anything I said?”

Those are all things this all mouth and no action blogger has done over the years. The point was, a great many who speak incessantly about the problems are folks who know first hand what needs to be done from experience and having been in the trenches.

Chi Chi said: “Mine gets at least 1 e-mail from me a month. But if that is where it stops, it is just so much wasted cyberspace.”

No, its not. Not at all. When millions send the same message things change. And millions sending the same message always begins with one person doing so first.

The think tanks and studies, Chi Chi, provide rational choices, strategies, and tactics for approaching large problems capable of being implemented ONLY if a majority of people can be brought on board for those choices, strategies, and tactics.

Do your good deeds, and be happy that you have such abundance to be generous of your time and effort. But, don’t get self-righteous and demean the contributions of others whose efforts in education, public service, and public speaking are responsible for so much good that is taking place.

We live in one of the wealthiest nations on earth, and it became so partly as a result of folks in public speaking, public service, think tanks, government and private enterprise. We have the luxury of getting upset over a broken fingernail, or fender bender. That is true wealth and luxury.

I agree, we should share it, and stop squandering on the next generation’s credit card.

Posted by: David R. Remer at April 19, 2007 10:55 PM
Post a comment