Imus producer referred to Obama's "Jew-hating name"
On the February 2 edition of MSNBC's Imus in the Morning, the show's executive producer, Bernard McGuirk, claimed that Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) has "a Jew-hating name." The remark followed a flurry of other negative comments from host Don Imus, McGuirk, and co-host Charles McCord about the presumptive Democratic presidential candidate, calling Obama a "creep," "a wind-watching wimp," and "a flip-flopping weasel."
The last smear was an apparent reference by Imus to statements Obama made in response to remarks by Sen. Joseph R. Biden (D-DE) documented in The New York Observer.
Various media figures have highlighted Obama's middle name -- "Hussein" -- suggesting, or asserting that it will hurt him with voters.
Imus initially agreed with McGuirk's "Jew-hating" comment with a "[y]es," but then said: "Well, that's a little far, don't you think?" to which McGuirk responded: "Yeah, probably."
As Media Matters for America has noted, in 2006, Imus referred to the "Jewish management" of CBS Radio as "money-grubbing bastards."
From the February 2 edition of MSNBC's Imus in the Morning:
IMUS: I saw Al Sharpton with -- with Chris Matthews yesterday, and he was -- he was terrific.
McCORD: I saw that.
IMUS: Wasn't he good?
McCORD: He was excellent.
IMUS: But the -- but the point is -- well, Biden -- it's just idiotic what Biden says. But Obama's a creep, a front-running creep, too, so --
McGUIRK: Flip-flopping --
IMUS: Really, I mean, that's -- that's a weasel.
McGUIRK: He was OK with the statements until he was against the statements.
IMUS: Yeah, he's not -- he's not -- first of all, he's not qualified to be president, that's one, and two, he's a flip-flopping weasel.
McCORD: A wind-watching wimp.
IMUS: Oh, thank you, Charles.
McGUIRK: With a Jew-hating name.
IMUS: Yes. Eleven -- well, that's a little far, don't you think?
McGUIRK: Yeah, probably.
Biden is a regular on the Imus program, just like Kerry . They are his budides as is Paul Begala. He id defending his buddy Biden. Its amazing, Obama has been on Imus also.
Doris makes you wonder if Olbermann will name him "Worst Person in the World"? Doubtful. Why? Because they are all Corporate phonies. Imus is hideous but at least he has the guts to attack MSNBC for being phony. His nonsense wont end until people like Biden, Kerry, Lieberman, Harry Reid stop appearing on his show.
Some one said that Olberman may be under contractual obligation not to disparage other MSNBC shows. Imus and his crew get away with this crap because he has a different contractual relationship with MSNBC. I'm pretty certain he is not directly employed by them. They are leasing his radio show. And oh yeah Imus and his on air talent are a bunch idiots. I can't stand those cave men.
Does having a Jewish-sounding name make you anti-Mohammedan?
Ummm, what in the world is a 'jew-hating name' supposed to be? And this show seems a bit too silly, anyways.
I don't know.
I someone had the name of, say, Adolf Yassir Gibson, then you might call it a "Jew-hating name." (And his parents would have some explaining to do.)
But seriously, this is hysterical. Enough idiotic personifications already. A name cannot conceivably hate someone, let alone systematically hate an entire ethnic group. I know they run a live show, but that doesn't mean you can't think before you make an absolute idiot of yourself. I really don't think Obama gives a damn about how his name is perceived. People whose vote might be effected by how a candidate's name sounds probably aren't voting Democrat anyway.
"a flip-flopping weasel... wind-watching wimp," these are code words for Politicians I Don't Like.
Show me a politician who doesn't shift positions with the response of the electorate, and i will show you an unemployed politician. Personally, I think that's a good thing... I do not vote for people to be dictators.
And remember how, just five minutes ago, the problem with Obama was that "we don't know anything about him"? Apparently, in zero elapsed time, the righty pinheads have gathered adequate data to conclude that Obama is a "wind-watcher" and "flip-flopper."
Amen.
Kerry got that rap and couldn't really shake it. For what? Bush said we had to go to war or we were all dead, so Kerry voted for it. When it was determined that there were no WMD's, no Saddam-Al Qaeda link, and no "Mission Accomplished," he came out against it. If that makes him a flip-flopper, then that's fine with me.
What these moron right-wingers don't get is that politicians are not sports fans. No one likes fair-weather bandwagon jumping Johnny-Come-Lately sports fans. But politicians are different. They have to pay attention to public opinion and adapt to changing information and diverse environments. If not, then they're just dictators, like you said. I think it's safe to say that, 3 1/2 years removed from "Bring 'em on" and the shameless spectacle of "Mission Accomplished," true Americans are fed up with Cowboy politics. A stubborn leader is not necessarily a strong leader.
George Bush was against the 9/11 Commision before he was for it.
George Bush was against the Department of Homeland Security before he was for it.
George Bush was against increasing troops in Iraq before he was for it.
Okay...so was Pelosi then.
It is sad that this needs to be pointed out to you, but the Republicans alone spun any change in Kerry's positions as flip-flopping. They choose to spin any change Bush does in myriad other ways. Pelosi has nothing to do with this debate. Try to pay attention here and post something relevant next time.
What and mess up his perfect record?
George Bush was against the 9/11 Commision before he was for it.
George Bush was against the Department of Homeland Security before he was for it.
George Bush was against increasing troops in Iraq before he was for it.
-----------------------------------------------
George Bush thought global warming was a ridiculous idea until faced with an Inconvenient Truth.
But Kerry ran a presidential campaign on not being against the war but "doing it better". Instead of running on ending it, he ran on a platform of escalation and attacking MORE countries. I wish people would give up this fantasy that Kerry was somehow the anti-war candidate. He never was, he was always for the persecution of Iraq, from the Iraqi Liberation Act to his presidential campaign to every vote in the Senate to keep funding this damned war crime. Kerry is NOT on our side, he's with the orcs.
Remember this ?
http://mediamatters.org/items/200612080006?made_comment=1
I do remember that, but Imus and his producers apparently do not. It's truly amazing. Having a Muslim-sounding name makes you a "Jew-hater" but airing Jewish epithets is no big deal? I'm confused.
What Howard Stern has wrought...
Howard Stern may be the most significant factor in the proliferation of this whole "shock jock" thing. I don't profess to be either an historian or authority on the matter but in my recollection it was Howard Stern who broke down the barriers to decency and civility on the airwaves in such a dramatic fashion. This stuff must sell because now you have other outrageous personalities flourishing on the air, people like Michael Savage, Don Imus, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and others who are essentially just "shock jocks". Although some of them cloak themselves in a mantel of respectability, it's the basically the same concept as Stern's... saying outrageously offensive things. Considering their popularity someone might make a credible argument that esssentially we are a nation of bigots... the bigotry just being a matter of degree. Many people are listening to (or watching) these shows and advertisers are buying adverising so they must be giving the public something they want. I am far from being a prissy prude but even I'm offended by how low the level of discourse has sunk on the airwaves. Please forgive me for ranting...
Howard Stern couldn't shock anyone, even if he were directly connected to a Van der Graaf Generator.
Stern is a shock jock, but no ones takes him seriously and he doesn't want to be taken seriously. I don't think we need to worry about politics and two lesbians having a bolgna throwing contest getting mixe up. The issues with shows like Imus or Rush is that they are just as stupid and offensive as Stern but they are treated seriously. There's people out there who want Rush to run as president. Not a joke, they really want that. I've worked with poeple who think this but seem rational in every other way.
I agree Imus is an equal opportunity hater. He hates and ridicules everyone regardless of race, gendor, or politicial affiliation. Rush and Hannity obviously only go one way. But still I don't understand how politicians and mainstream media folks want to grant him credibility by being on his show. Maybe they are playing the lovable but ornery old coot angle. Don't know. There is no accounting for public taste.
"no ones takes (Stern) seriously"
I'm in agreement with you there. My point is that it was Stern who opened the door for people like Michael Savage, Don Imus and others... and some, like Limbaugh, for example, have an almost mainstream legitimacy about them now. It's crazy...
Back in the 1930's, there was a rabid ranter on the radio by the name of Father Coughlin, always going off about minorities and progressives and the rest of the imaginary bad guys the righties have always whined about. He is the true grand-father of today's Limbaughs and Savages, not Stern.
"Father Coughlin"
Good point, Red... I had forgotten about Father Coughlin.
MSNBC- Put the "IMUS in the Morning" Show back on Radio.
Period. There can't be enough viewers to justify this contiunig crap.
The Imus show beats CNN in the morning, it draws corporate viewers. Its not going anywhere .
I am going to guess his main audience demographics is old rich white guys. Any idea if this is true?
I thought is was funny, brings me back to the old Archie Bunker days. Everyone needs to lighten up and quit being such cry babies.
Those days are over, pal. Thank God.
Only once by accident I did hear Mr.anus and he smelled too bad and never again.
Bernard McGuirk has long been a racist of the worst kind on this morning program; I am surprised that it has taken this long for anyone to mention it. It is rare to see (and hear) such "in your face" hatred and vitriol as his, displayed daily on MSNBC and on the nation's air waves. Imus lets him get by with and say whatever he wants, which means that he is endorsing his commentary. There have been astoundingly uncharacteristic comments about blacks, gays, Jews and Democrats that would be the cause of firing and termination by any company in this country had they been made on their premises.
From a psychological standpoint, McGuirk is probably, clearly, a homosexual, due to his intense hatred of himself and the manifestation of his hatred towards gays and the homosexual community (his bland commentary daily is peppered with anti-gay and homophobic references).
But, considering what he has to work with, one cannot but feel a certain kind of empathy for him. That bald head, short, scrawny body and un-homosexual-like predilection for those (to use Imus' favorite word) "awful" striped shirts on a daily basis--all can produce only a shake of the head and a feeling of sorrow.
As for McCord, well, it's well known in the industry that he's nothing more than a fawning, Imus-ass-licking sycophant. Has been doing it for over 20 years. . .
Satire, people. If you don't watch or listen regularly, you won't get it. That said, McGuirk does frequently go over the top, but the show is too entertaining and informative otherwise to let his comments be a decisive factor as to whether I watch it or not. And Imus is no fan of the current Administration, either; his current terms for Bush and Cheney are "moron" and "war criminal," respectively. This is the kind of broad-brush article that damages Media Matters' credibility.
I think you're all missing the point of the Imus show--except maybe for the person who referered to "equal opportunity haters." I'd say equal opportunity ridiculers.
You people are much to literal and have no sense of humor.
I wonder how someone like Oscar Wilde or George Bernard Shaw would have faired with this crowd.
Incidentally, McGurk is not short and scrawny. He's tall and beat the hell out of Sid Rosenberg in a charity boxing match.
Advertisers and Audience Share
I agree that Imus is not going anywhere unless the revenue sources (advertisers) start withdrawing and/or demanding change. These comments are all well and good and help us better understand the issue and the arguements but it is also kind of a circle-jerk. What are you going to DO to maybe bring about a change. So take your blogging and emailing energies to the sites of the major program sponsors and let them know what you think.
Found this elsewhere on the net, which really summarizes greatly what we've been discussing here. Well written and succinctly summarized by one Clinton Fein of Annoy.com.
And, as for the charity fight between Sid and Bernie? Well, Sid did absolutely no training and Bernie trained for two months. They are both short guys, neither could stand over 5'10" though I don't know exactly. While McGuirk is "scrappy" in the sense that he may have toned up and put on some muscle for that fight, he is still possesses no symmetry and has no real frame to hang anything on. Since Rosenberg was in "been sittin' behind the radio mike and haven't worked out in over a decade" shape, naturally Bernie pounced and trounced him in the ring. Though why we are even discussing this is beyond me. He's still a homophobic homosexual (in the vein of Jim West, the Spokane Mayor who lived in the closet his whole life) and really needs professional psychiatric help. Those kind are always so pitifully transparent, aren't they??
Anyway, here's the excerpt I wanted to post:
"Despite the childish, sexist, homophobic and racist diatribes that define Imus and his crew, and have caused anchors like Contessa Brewer to cringe in embarrassment before bitter and public feuds separated them on-air forever more (or at least until MSNBC does a reality show about supposed journalists), it’s highly unlikely that a genuine NBC journalist reporting on developments in the Middle East will inspire any sympathy from groups like the “Holy Jihad Brigades” if they happen to catch Imus referring to Arabs as stinking ragheads with dirty laundry on their heads, as he has done before. (As he sits, ironically, with a gay cowboy hat in New Jersey). Or in the case of the now-fired Imus sportscaster, Sid Rosenberg, who stated on-air that Serena and Venus Williams were best suited posing for National Geographic rather than Playboy and that Palestinians mourning the death of Yasser Arafat were "stinking animals” upon whom the Israelis "ought to drop the bomb right there, kill 'em all right now..." Perhaps it was the crack cocaine talking, but it was neither his drug habits nor that comment that got Rosenberg fired."
Imus has always been an ill-tempered, old white man. People like him know that their time is limited. He is looking backwards for the future. Sad!!!