MSNBC's Imus referred to "Jewish management" of CBS Radio as "money-grubbing bastards"
As the Forward newspaper reported in a December 8 online article, Don Imus referred to the "Jewish management" of CBS Radio as "money-grubbing bastards" on the November 30 broadcast of MSNBC's Imus in the Morning. Imus was discussing a past conflict with his bosses about hosting the musical group the Blind Boys of Alabama. Executive producer Bernard McGuirk asked, "Even if you wear a beanie, how can you not love the Blind Boys?" Imus continued, "I said, 'They're handicapped, they're black, and they're blind. How do we lose here?' And then a light bulb just went off over [the managers'] scummy little heads." CBS Radio owns WFAN, the New York station that is the flagship for Imus' radio show.
From the November 30 edition of MSNBC's Imus in the Morning:
IMUS: A great hour coming up. The Blind Boys of Alabama are gonna sing a bunch of tunes for us. I mean, they, you know, are just an American treasure.
CHARLES McCORD (co-host): That is not an overstatement.
IMUS: I remember when I first had 'em on a few years ago how the Jewish management at --
McCORD: Mmm-hmm.
IMUS: -- at whatever, whoever we work for, CBS, or whatever it is, were bitching at me about it. You know.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Careful there, Mel.
IMUS: And, uh -- well, not Mel. Mel's always [unintelligible]
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I meant Mel Gibson.
IMUS: Oh. Well, no, no, that's not from where I'm coming, obviously.
McCORD: You meant Mel Allen, then.
IMUS: But, uh, you know.
McGUIRK: They were dissing the handicapped African-Americans --
IMUS: Remember that?
McGUIRK: -- who love the baby Jesus.
McCORD: Yes.
IMUS: Remember that?
McGUIRK: Absolutely.
IMUS: We had a meeting in my office.
McCORD: I recall.
McGUIRK: The Blind Boys? No, no!
IMUS: They were furious. But, of course, I don't care what they say and never have.
McCORD: Yeah.
IMUS: And thank God. What, Bernie?
McGUIRK: Even if you wear a beanie, how can you not love the Blind Boys?
McCORD: These guys.
IMUS: Well, as I -- I tried to put it in terms that these money-grubbing bastards could understand.
IMUS: I said -- and they're always worried about my image and all that sort of thing, you know. And I said, "They're handicapped, they're black, and they're blind. How do we lose here?" And then a light bulb just went off over their scummy little heads. And, plus, they're great!
McCORD: And they are great. Where is the downside? Explain that to me.
The other right-wing media mogul you should worry about
Palin's book and Obama's bow: a media week to forget
Media Matters: The Palin chronicles
US History classes I remember the teacher telling us the limits of free speech. calling someone ( group ) names is not something the first ammendment allows you to do. You are free to voice your opinions and share , but not at a cost to those who disagree. I must remind Imus of what happened Nov 7, 2006 loud and clear. Cable and sattellite have given these guys a false sense of enhanced freedom of speech.
Where did you attend school, Nazi Germany? Did your teacher also tell you you couldn't yell "fire" in a crowded crematorium? Good God, man. Since when does the First Amendment prohibit speech because others "disagree"?
Ann Arbor Junior High School. You assumed and found wrong.
Your teacher was wrong. Sorry he / she left that impression with you.
I'm pretty sure you're taking that teacher's statement a bit too literally. It's entirely possible to use one's speech in a manner that threatens other people, and that's not legally protected.
It's entirely possible to use one's speech in a manner that threatens other people, and that's not legally protected.
I took immediate umbrage to the assumption I am a Nazi solely due to my name. The constitution does not give the right to citizen's to impune one's character. And use the word bastard to publicly describe an entire group of people chips away at the intent of the first ammendment.
I share your disgust at what Imus said, but his speech here is constitutionally protected. The First Amendment protects almost all expression, with few exceptions. Those would include obscenity and incitement, neither of which Imus even approaches in this instance.
For incitement, the standard test is whether the speech or expression "advoca[tes] the use of force or...law violation [and] is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action." Brandenberg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969).
Y'all might be thinking of the doctrine of "fighting words," which are "those personally abusive epithets which, when addressed to the ordinary citizen, are, as a matter of common knowledge, inherently likely to provoke violent reaction." Cohen v. California, 403 U.S. 15 (1971). Such speech isn't constitutionally protected. Again, though, Imus isn't near the line because there needs to be a more imminent threat of violence.
There's a difference between saying something that other people might disagree with and threatening people. I'm sure you see the difference. Regarding your name, it never crossed my mind to make a judgement. I was referring to the claim that the First Amendment forbids speech that people disagree with. That, my friend, is Nazi-like.
And use the word bastard to publicly describe an entire group of people chips away at the intent of the first ammendment.
No, it doesn't. It does show Imus as the scummy one, but it is protected speech. Which is why we get to say Imus is the scummy one also.
I think you meant "auditorium", not "crematorium" . . . and by the way, Wolf's right: free speech does NOT give you the right to make dangerous speech, such as yelling "fire" in a crowded auditorium . . .
Wingnuts cannot seem to understand that while Anus, Insanity, Bull OhReally, et. al. have the right to make hateful, inaccurate, or racist statements, we have the EQUAL right to respond and refute those statements.
Wolf implied a specific claim...that is, he implied that the 1st amendment does not protect what Imus said (at least I think that's what he implied, otherwise his post is entirely off-topic). Do you agree with that specific claim?
has NOTHGING to do with this. The First Amendment is a restraint only on the Government. So Imass can't be arrested for what he said. But Imass could get fired for what he said, and he wouldn't have a Constitutional pot to piss in.
lesson and I was in the 8th grade too. I can see my teacher in my head right now. He did the "fire" and the name calling. I was in Houston at the time.
I'm still cannot get over how there is not national outrage for the "Halfican" remark made by Morgan yesterday.
refrained from submitting. I felt maybe Mr Obana should address this first. If he is not outraged, then who am I to speak ?
I have had teachers in grade school and college try to promote their anti-freedom political agenda as being correct. By the time I was in College was when I had the courage to call them on it right in front of their class.
I may have been wiser to let them push their Conservatism as the only correct ideology and thereby get a better grade. It was more important to me to protect the class from the false information.
Wolf, I don't see how you ever believed your teacher was correct? Do you still believe you don't have freedom of speech? I hope not, for your own sake.
What's happing here? Did someone declare it Bigot Season?
This may NOT rise to the level of Michael Richard's recent racist rant...BUT it's still racist, or bigoted, or just plain not very nice.
Jews. Money grubbing. Mmmmm sounds like an old stereotype.
There are times I believe we go overboard to appear politically correct. BUT this has NOTHING to do with being P.C.
The N-word hurts African-Americans. These kind of stereotypical remarks must hurt those that are Jewish.
Yeah I suppose it falls under Free Speech...BUT I'm still shocked that Imus can get away with this. Other radio personalities have been suspended OR fired for less, or equally disgusting remarks.
Here on Boston radio a talk radio personality got FIRED for calling a woman running for Governor [obscure party] a "fat lesbian".
Just one question MMFA...HOW is this Conservative MIS-information? Or Conservative anything? Imus is a "free spirit", he INSULTS everyone. And I've never read/heard he was a Republican or a Conservative.
Media Matters is not just for "conservative misinformation." They also try to point out hate speech in the media, or hateful remarks. I don' t think it would matter if the specific media personality was an identified conservative or liberal.
...and about 70% of us are Democrats! It still hurts when I hear someone sterotype all of us. But on the other hand when you have Jewish people like Wolfowitz and Pearle in predominate positions helping creeps like Bush and Bush's brain, Cheney, it once again shines a light on the Jewish people and makes the rest of US look bad.
P.S. Any form of Lobbying should be outlawed. We really need to get each of our state congressional bodies to enact public financing, now, while people are really disgusted with corrupt politicians. This is the time!
What an idiotic observation. Thank god there's morons in the world like you to laugh at.
Wasn't his 15-minutes over several years ago? The exchange as quoted above is ridiculous. Here's a shovel, Imus. Keep digging.
Your two residences are in Manhattan and Westport, CT. Another faux cowboy, just like Bush . . .
...curmudgeon who bludgeons.
But at least he's a smart enough to keep the collar up on his cowpoke coat, which will keep that prairie dust whistling through the studio off of his neck. If he's going to wear a costume, perhaps he could trade from time to time for Ann Coulter's little black dress and she could wear the cowpoke coat and hat.
Holly;
The question then becomes is that really cross dressing?
is barely big enough to cover Imus' big fat head. Although I guess that would be good enough.
After 9-11 Conservatives have attempted to gain Jewish sympathy by resorting to racism againset Muslims.
But they forgot that the Jewish community is very smart (they vote democrat in every election) and the latter knows that Conservatism has its roots in the pro-slavery movement and Nazi Germany.
Personally I think the guy is an AHOLE, but I've heard alot worse. Come to think of it some of the worst things I've heard said about Jews came from Jews themselves. I think we all need to think and use a little discretion before we speak or else we tarnish our own credibility.
Yes, and when I used to play basketball with a bunch of black guys, after the game they would use the "N" word with each other relentlessly. That doesn't mean that it's alright for me to use it.
Intolerance for Jews seems to be increasing in leaps and bounds these last few years, both on the Right and on the Left. It is very disconcerting.
I guess if you're going to call out the people who do mean these kind of things, you have to call out the ones who really don't.
I'd put Imus squarely in the latter category. This is totally in keeping with his schtick. He used to have Kinky Friedman (and the Texas Jewboys) on the show to sing "They Ain't Makin' Jews Like Jesus Anymore." Yes, the lyrics are as offensive as the title would suggest.
Anyway I guess that's actually by way of defending Imus. This kind of thing doesn't "slip out" a la Mel Gibson. This is par for the course.
Jeez, is there anything or anyone you angry liberals like??? You sound like a bunch of kevetching old hens: "I hate O'Reilly!", Hannety's a liar!", "W is Hitler!", Tucker's an A-Hole!", "Matthews is a buffoon!" Bitter doesn't even begin to describe you people.
so, you're not disputing that Imus is anti-semitic, you just think its ok so no one should get upset about it...
weren't you flipping out about nazi germany on another thread? I guess anti-semitism isn't so bad as long as its aimed at liberals right?
What on earth are you talking about? The Nazi thing was about someone who said the First Amendment banned speech that offended others. I labelled his statements as Nazi-like.
I don't listen to Imus and I can't tell from the transcript if he's anti-semitic. Now if he starts saying he wants to wipe Israel off the map and that Jews are apes and monkeys and they put the blood of "palestinian" children in their pastries, then I'd have a serious problem with him. But so far it's only radical muslims that say these things.
BTW, I know someone with a Scottish background who is the most money-grubbing person I've ever met. Does that make me anti-Scottish? I don't think so.
"BTW, I know someone with a Scottish background who is the most money-grubbing person I've ever met. Does that make me anti-Scottish? I don't think so."
But connecting, if not correlating "a Scottish background" with "money-grubbing" does make you suspect. But you should be running system checks on yourself. When you overlay a cliche on an individual, you shouldn't look to liberals to pinpoint faulty wiring. You should wonder about yourself.
Well, you should wonder about yourself if you don't want your particular set of prejudices (We all prejudge.) to be the strings while you play the puppet.
I hope you read in the prior post my admission of prejudice (We all prejudge.). I fight my prejudgments everyday. Somedays I snip my prejudice before it can surface and somedays, my prejudgments rule me. We were all born pure, but we all learned to prehate, to predoubt, to predisparage. Still, in all of us is the desire to be good and fair and open. Somedays I manage this and somedays I operate from my assumptions, however mean-spirited and unrighteous they might be.
But the real work is connecting across the rifts. We're so divided.
Well, now you leftists have done it. You've got me thinking about the "race" of other human beings and I thought about one of my best friends who happens to be Mexican. He's even more "money grubbing" than my Scottish friend. Does my calling my Mexican friend "money grubbing" make me anti-Mexican? OF COURSE NOT!!! Now do you get it Holly? I think some of you leftists (apparently not you, Holly) are so focused on "race" that by default, you become racists. I prefer to see people as belonging to the Human Race and there are only two types of people in the human race: The decent and the indecent. PERIOD!
We can now bitch till our hearts are content and we will hear less and less from O'Reilly & Co.
Since the evil ones are out of office and junior is a lame duck .
PS : I'm not liberal, just a free thinking, considerate, environmental friendly citizens who believes what the constitution and the bill of rights say now what I want them to say.
You're our snookem-wookems.
Our poodin' head.
Our pumpkin.
Hugs and kisses.
Holly,
You really got a laugh out of me with that one. In fact, that was the first post I've read on this site that was humorous and not filled with bitter, angry negativity. Please keep it up.
there was real affection in my ribbing. Let's stop all this carping back and forth and figure out a way to make America a better country and Earth a better planet. We all want that, liberals and conservatives. And we all want our children to be safe: Jews, Muslims, Christians, Taoists, Buddhists, atheists and so on.
In fact, that was the first post I've read on this site that was humorous and not filled with bitter, angry negativity.
Yeah, sometimes MMFA posters write stuff like this:
Liberal Filth
You Libs are the most selfish, narcissistic filth-holes I've ever had the displeasure of conversing with. I can't take you disgusting, self-worhipping degenerates any more. I can't believe I wasted so much of my time in this rotten, stinking cesspool full of cancerous slugs. Enjoy your pathetic "lives." You all deserve each other. Here's my going away present for tex and all the other economically challenged dolts here: [link to www.townhall.com]
Good bye and good riddance.
[link to mediamatters.org]
...then they run off and change their usernames, then come back and pontificate about civility.
YOU have O'Reilly, Coulter, Savage, Beck and Republichater, we arent even in the bitter RACE. Tell me were you perhaps in a coma during the Clinton years? Now THAT was world class bitter. We arent even close to catching up. Ever been to Freerepublic? Now THAT is bitter. We are Ghandian by comparison. What we ARENT is dumb enough to take your tired, old, overworked and cliched talking point seriously.
Corn,
I've noticed that as long as you can prevent an argument from being about the actual subject matter it concerns, you feel like you're winning it. That's why you insist on insulting people.
If you place Imus comments in the context of the millenia old stereotype of Jews as people who A. control everything and B. only care about money they are extremely anti-semitic. The unattributed antisemitic comments you mentioned, which I suppose I am to assume come from Arab sources, are the latest interpretation of something that is older than even the concept of "The Middle East".
So if your dismissal of his comments is out of ignorance of the pervasive nature of the stereotype, fine. But if you are simply dismissing the criticism because it comes from a liberal source, than clearly you care less about anti-semitism than you do about attributing negative aspects to enourmous groups of people (liberals).
Anti-Semitism is a form of prejudice, and prejudice is what you are expressing when you label all liberals hateful, stupid, uptight, ect ect
So I guess what i'm saying is I can't figure out whether you're against prejudice, or just against prejudice when you feel like it helps your argument.
The anti-semitic comments were not "unattributed." I attributed them to radical muslims and yes, I am unashamedly prejudiced against radical muslims who want Israel "wiped off the face of the map." You gotta problem with that?
Being angry at someone for a REASON that is WHAT THEY DO or say they want to do is by definition NOT prejudice. If you are just prejudice against Muslims period THAT would be prejudice. You sure are angry for someone taking US to task for being bitter and angry. Then again hypocrisy and a total lack of a sense of irony is a defining characteristic of the wingnut crowd.
...ever.
By the intellectual depths and profundity of your riposte. I am sure you are the debating terror of your third grade class.
ever.
To be a racist, an antisemite, whatever he wants to be and to express those views publicly. What he does not have the RIGHT to is a nationally syndicated radio program from which to spew his crap.
I dont want to live in a country like Germany today, where denying the Holocaust, or expressing sympathy for the Nazis, can land you in jail. People should be free to express unpopular opinions, because popular opinions really dont need the protection of law.
That being said, I cant imagine why any sponsors would want to be associated with this pig. I can only assume that any company that would buy commercial time on his show is endorsing his viewpoint. And I hope that those who disagree with this prick take note of his sponsors and refuse to patronize them.
Did you stop to think about why Imus was referring to the religious background of his managment in such disparaging terms. It appears he's just expanding his career in another direction. He's trying a gig as a celebrity impersonator, and he's starting out with an impersonation of Mel Gibson.
This type of hate is typical coming from Imus.
I've heard Imus say that he was supporting Kerry in the last election...BUT at other times I've heard him suck up to some very conservative Republicans, so I have never been able to figure him out. Maybe he just likes to hear the sound of his own voice..........actually he reminds me a lot of Chris Matthews and John McCain( both of whom speak on both sides of their mouths).
Actually I do. I dont really see any difference between you hating muslims and wanting to kill all of them and radical muslims hating me and wanting to kill me.
There is absolutely no difference, in fact, what you're saying is you basically agree with the policy of radical Islam, you just disagree with the particulars of whom it should be applied to.
Maybe you should consider converting. I'm sure there's a cave somewhere in Afghanistan waiting for you.
Forgive me if I don't take your heartfelt defense of Israel as sincere, since you can't even see how calling jews "money grubbing bastards" is offensive. You are reciting sean hannity conservatism by rote without any actual thought to the inconsistencies of what you are saying.
Good grief Fatty,
You sure have a knack for reading something, twisting the words in your mind to fit what you want them to mean and then spewing venom at your imagined target. Who said anything about "hating muslims and wanting to kill all of them"? That's right, Fatty, nobody said anything of the kind. That came from your warped imagination. As much as you desperately want to believe that I said that, I'm afraid your little pre-conceived notions got the better of you. Now Fatty, before you respond to any more posts, take a deep breath, re-read the post (twice if neccessary), focus like a laser beam, and THEN reply.
Some good posts here, some good points made. I just wonder how many of y'all would be worked up if Imus was refering to Appalachians as Hillbillies, or any other rural folk as rednecks. As far as I'm concerned, people refer to us this way all the time and get a free pass from the press and society in general. Talk about hypocrisy - the thought process is the same - hateful and ignorant.
It depends on the political views of the victim of the slurs. If the Appalachian in your hypothetical were perceived to be conservative by the "progressives" on this site (Solon in particular), they would be hailing Imus as their great savior for labelling him a redneck. In fact, redneck and hillbilly would be mild compared to the slurs they would use. Just read any of the posts from Solon and you'll see what I mean.
What WERE the odds. I would think Imus was a jerk for that too though generalization about people in a regional area isnt racist per say, it is still bigotry and ignorance. In the instance cited byUtilbin one that DOES happen quite often I agree. I often stand up for conservatives when a post, not directed at someone generalizing against liberals, generalizes unfairly against conservatives. Keep showing us exactly how seldom you have any dim conception what you are talking about though, it is amusing in a trainwreck sort of way.
"I often stand up for conservatives when a post, not directed at someone generalizing against liberals, generalizes unfairly against conservatives."
Oh really, Solon? Let's see you provide an example. Just one.
This from the thread :
Conservative media on Iraq Study Group report: "[T]he problem with Iraq is the Iraqis"
Personally I know some pretty intelligent conservatives, they just see things differently from me. A few intelligent conservatives post on this site. Its not as black and white as liberals are smart and conservatives are dumb. This administration is NOT conservative, its a group of radical statists that want to expand executive power and impose their political wetdream on the world at ANY cost. Some conservatives bought into the dream and felt it would be worth the cost. I disagree with the concept but dont blame them for seeing it differently. Its time to aknowlege though that the whole enterprise is a disaster and the discussion should be about how to end the nightmare in Iraq in the best way for us and the Iraqis - solon / Friday December 8, 2006 01:00:30 PM EST
I wouldn't have believed it if I hadn't seen it with my own eyes.
nice apology.
I know you actually meant to say
" Sorry Solon, I was wrong with the statement I made... I really didn't mean to generalize your views on conservatives, but it just fit in so nice with my typical "but liberals do it to" defense that I lost sight of the fact that I might actually be wrong ! I really like to jump to conclusions about people and tend to make ignorant generalizations about the world... Sorry I was projecting!"
MHK,
Do you have anything constructive to add? No? I didn't think so.