Boston Globe headline "Obama's silence on Imus alarms some blacks" unsupported by article
An April 11 Boston Globe article bearing the headline "Obama's silence on Imus alarms some blacks" purported to present prominent African-Americans "alarm[ed]" by Sen. Barack Obama's (D-IL) "silence" regarding nationally syndicated radio host Don Imus' April 4 remark referring to members of the Rutgers University women's basketball team as "nappy-headed hos" -- though, as the Globe noted, Obama did issue a statement on April 9. But of the "black activists" cited in the article, only one -- Princeton University professor Melissa Harris Lacewell -- singled out Obama for criticism over his response to the Imus matter.
On his Drudge Report website, Internet gossip Matt Drudge linked to the Globe article on April 11 under the headline: "Boston Globe: Obama's Silence on Imus Issue Sets Off Alarm ..."
In the article, Lacewell was quoted criticizing Obama for "his unwillingness to touch" the Imus controversy. The other sources quoted in the article either did not criticize Obama for his response to Imus or said that all the 2008 presidential candidates -- not just Obama -- have a responsibility to "speak up more forcefully about Imus."
According to the Globe:
With the Rev. Al Sharpton leading calls Monday for radio host Don Imus to be fired over racially insensitive remarks, Senator Barack Obama's presidential campaign avoided the controversy throughout the day.
Not until Monday evening, five days after Imus's comments were uttered and hours after CBS Radio and MSNBC announced a two-week suspension for the radio host, did Obama weigh in, saying in a statement: "The comments of Don Imus were divisive, hurtful, and offensive to Americans of all backgrounds." Obama did not address whether he thought Imus should be taken off the air.
The episode is the first test of how Obama -- who is of mixed-race background -- is handling the contentious issue of race in his presidential campaign. Even as polls have shown other Democrats attracting a large share of the black vote, Obama has steered clear of the kind of activism symbolized by Sharpton and the Rev. Jesse Jackson, who were both highly visible in the Imus episode but whose aggressiveness on race issues has alienated some white voters in the past.
But with Obama battling other Democrats -- most notably Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York -- for the support of black voters, the candidate's reticence on the Imus issue set off alarms yesterday among some black activists who are anxious to see him more forcefully push for racial justice.
Melissa Harris Lacewell, a professor of politics and African-American studies at Princeton University, said Obama missed an opportunity to prove himself to blacks and white liberals who would have wanted Obama take the lead in denouncing Imus.
"This was so easy, and his unwillingness to touch it tells me this is going to be his third rail, and race never goes away in politics," Harris Lacewell said. "Black people want to love Barack. They're doing everything they can to love Barack. We want to believe that Barack is better than this. But they will turn on him."
While suggesting that Obama might be subject to different expectations in the Imus matter, the other two African-American academics quoted in the article did not endorse a different standard nor single him out for criticism. Ron Walters, University of Maryland professor and former aide to Rainbow/PUSH Coalition founder Jesse Jackson, said:
"There are people that are just waiting for him to jump out there in the crosshairs and be a race leader," Walters said. If Obama spoke out, "that would put him in a different role: a race leader. And that would pull back the covers for those who don't see race when they look at Barack Obama."
University of Pennsylvania professor and author Michael Eric Dyson said that all of the candidates have a responsibility to speak out, while suggesting that Obama might be more susceptible to angering "the black majority." Specifically, according to the Globe, Dyson "said he supports Obama's campaign but questions why he did not speak up more forcefully about Imus. He added that the other presidential candidates had the same responsibility." The Globe further quoted Dyson:
"Here's the point: Paying attention to the issues of race is an American concern," he said. "It looks as if he's [Obama] being so careful and cautious not to ruffle the feathers of the mainstream that he may inadvertently raise the hackles of the black majority."
In addition, the Globe quoted Democratic consultant Joyce Ferriabough:
In a closely watched speech last month in Selma, Ala., Obama declared that he was part of the "Joshua generation" -- likening himself to the Biblical successor to Moses who led the Jewish people into the promised land -- and thus located himself in the post-liberation generation.
While acknowledging debts to civil rights pioneers, Obama has made clear that he represents a different kind of politics, rooted deeply in coalition-building, not anger and outrage.
"He's cut from a different cloth, and that doesn't make him less black," said Joyce Ferriabough, a Boston-based Democratic consultant who is African-American. "His way of doing things is a lot more measured, less fiery, but that doesn't make him less effective. He needs to be the candidate of the people, and the people aren't just black."
[...]
Ferriabough, the Democratic consultant, said Obama's campaign is tied to the candidate's personal energy and charisma, rather than those who are declaring their support for him.
"Endorsements won't make or break this candidate," said Ferriabough, who said she has not committed to supporting any candidate but is leaning toward Obama.
"Obama doesn't need to go on the soapbox," Ferriabough said. "Others are doing it, led by Sharpton and Jesse Jackson. He's nipping at Hillary, so he's playing for real."
The Globe quoted Rev. Al Sharpton criticizing Obama, but the quote was from a Washington Times article published last month before the Imus controversy.
In an April 11 interview, Obama "called for the firing" of Imus and said he would never again appear on his show, according to an ABCNews.com report.
But yet Obama had no issue back in the summer appearing on Imus to help sell his book. The hyprocrisy stinks.
And how many months before the "NHH" remark did Obama appear on Imus? Your comment makes as much sense as Rush Limbaugh did back in his OxyContin days......
No, but Imus was doing this routine for years. His sidekick Bernie was making fun of Blacks, catholics, gays. Now everyone all of a sudden has had an awakening. Obama is as phony as the rest of them.
Agree. As David Brock stated in his recent letter... Imus has been doing this schtick for years. Obama is a bit of an opportunist. This is nothing new from the likes of Imus.
When it's all said and done, Imus will end up on XM or some such place and have an even larger audience.All together likely.
I do not know if he will be on the air somewhere again, from the look of him he does not look too healthy.
True...health permitting. However, he's looked like a crusty curmudgeon pretty much his whole life.
Hey, Pighaven, I once loaned lunch money to a girl who 8 years later knocked over a 7/11 and is now in jail. I, obviously, AM FUNDING CRIMINALS!!! Next stop- TERRORISM!!!
You missed his point - if the girl you loaned money too was knocking over a 7/11 at the time and you still gave her money, then you would have a fair analogy.....but you don't.
Peghen has a good point - all these people that are now throwing Imus to the wolves, were perfectly fine appearing on his program during all the prior insults and slurs he uttered - and there were plenty.
Thank you, that is exactly my point. And again as disgusting as his comments were , I think it is more disgusting that MSNBC pulled the plug on him the night before this charity Radio Thon that occurs on WFAN in NY. The use of MSNBC which they have covered for 10 years only would help raise money for these causes. MSNBC should be ashamed of themselves.
MSNBC Should also be ashamed for putting up with this for 10 years if it was so bad why did it take 10 years to pull it off? Dan Abrams should be fired.
And it blows this whole "corporate media in the pocket of one political party or another" idea up in smoke as well. All it took were some sponsors bailing and the backlash against this by the media - and poof, Imus is history. His ideology is irrelevant if dollars are at stake.
I don't know, man. The only thing the Repubs worship more than power is money.
I know, and the meek Democrats have never had an interest in either one.....riiiiiiight.
Maybe Obama has better things to do than to research past comments by Don Imus. Let's use the lunch money theory above. Even if he (she) gave money to a girl who currently was robbing 7/11s, but didn't know it, that doesn't make her an intentional funder of criminals.
Besides, just because you appeared on someone else's program doesn't mean you can't speak out against them if they are wrong.
POOF - up in smoke?
Are you trying to pretend that Imus is Republican?
If Obama really didn''t know of Imus' past offenses, I will cut him a little slack. If he was well aware of the past incident you do make a point.
The globe is calling out Obama for not speaking out, when actually he did. They slo fail to call out any other candidate for not speaking up, which as far as I have seen so far none other than Hilary or Obama have said a peep.
Should the globe be singling out Obama without doing the same for everyone else (Dem or Rep)? Aren't they flat out wrong since he actually did speak on the issue?
But you're assuming people who appeared on Imus' show were actually longtime, regular listeners of his, and knew about his past remarks.
Imus' show was not highly rated at all. Not very many people heard those previous comments, which is why people are only now realizing Imus does this kind of thing on his show.
You can't throw around labels like "hypocrite" when people like Obama probably had no idea Imus made racially insensitive remarks in the past. Some of those incidents were many years ago, and not well-publicized. I also don't think Imus radio show was even on in the Chicago market for Obama to hear. Barack even lived overseas for years, so wouldn't have heard about Imus in places like Indonesia.
In order for people to be "hypocrites" for appearing on Imus previously, you have to prove they knew about and willfully ignored Imus' past racial remarks.
So even his staff would be unaware he was going on a show that called a fellow Democratic Senator "satan".
I highly doubt that.
Prove it and if you can you do in fact make a valid point.
Thats a cop out. I do not want a President who has no idea what show he is going on. Thank God Senator Clinton never appeared on this show, she understood what it was about.
How about a President who knows about the different factions in a country he's about to invade?
This current President is a horrible person and President, but he is not running again. If you are trying to say Bush does things so Obama can do them, then that is deplorable. Obama has higher standards than the war criminal from Texas. (And appearing on Imus) was something he should never have done, if the show made comments about Senator Clinton before he appeared.
One other note about Imus- He was one of the few lone Anti- War voices being heard on a news network. What is the alternative now? ABC, Today and CBS and the regular "Lets ignore Americas problems shows"? How about CNN and FOX?Imus was right about this war and about helping Children.
peghen1428, It's just a radio show. His staff probably doesn't tell him what shows to go on and he probably was invited. His own staff probably didn't know about Imus' offensive past comments either. Obama is not being a phony here and this article accuses him of not speaking out. Besides, just because he appeared on his show it doesn't mean that he can't speak out against Imus if he's wrong.
Oh please, if a candidate or his staff is that clueless as to where he appears, then how prepared is he to lead this country? What if a stealth KKK group asked Obama to speak and he didn't do his homework about their backround first, and appeared anyway and professed ignorance later? Do you honestly think that would happen? No.
How much air time if any have his previous remarks recieved? If it wasn't for MM I wouldn't have had a clue. Also I said if he knew than you guys are in fact correct. If what Obamas camp actually knew was what most people knew before this incident, I don't see the big deal of him appearing previously.
"What if a stealth KKK group asked Obama to speak and he didn't do his homework about their backround first, and appeared anyway and professed ignorance later?"
Than that would look pretty bad, but that's not exactly what going on here. I do see your point though.
SO I ask again:
Should the globe be singling out Obama without doing the same for everyone else (Dem or Rep)? Aren't they flat out wrong since he actually did speak on the issue?
If you asked the Globe they would probably tell you that the article was also about prominent black leaders and their reaction to Imus.
Frankly, it's irrelevant to me what Clinton or Romney or any of them say about this issue - they will come out on whatever side is safe and doesn't get them in any political hot water.
You are correct, but they didn't do that. You can find all sorts of qoutes from prominent black leaders on this matter including Obama's. They called Obama out specifically when he actually did speak on the matter. So the globe is actually in the wrong.
What if a stealth KKK group asked Obama to speak and he didn't do his homework about their backround first, and appeared anyway and professed ignorance later? Do you honestly think that would happen?
You might wanna take a look at the guest list for the Ali G Show.
I'm just curious...
Does this same standard apply to Republicans as well? Does every Republican who appears on a show like Rush Limbaugh for example agree 100% with everything he says? Do you criticize them for appearing on Limbaugh, despite knowing he himself has made racially insensitive remarks repeatedly?
I think it's wrong to try distort Imus' idiotic remarks into attacks on people like Obama or anyone else who has appeared on Imus' show. Imus made the remarks, and he owns them. Nobody else has to apologize for what Imus said.
Brian,
It's not a matter of agreeing or not agreeing - Rush is responsible for his own words, as is Imus and the rest - nobody else.
It's just the shocked politicians that are now distancing themselves from Imus and calling him out for this particular instance, putting themselves up on some moral pedestal, are acting like this is the first time Imus has opened his big mouth......when he has been engaging in this type of stuff for years. It's just this time he went too far, and now the politicians are running away from a sinking ship. Typical.
Isn't his staff also based on Chicago? Do you REALLY think they had all heard of Imus, or listened to his show?
Reporters even went around the campus of Rutgers, which is located in a market where Imus has his highest radio ratings, and almost none of the students at Rutgers had ever even heard of Imus until now.
I'd say it's very possible Obama's staff were not aware of Imus' past racial remarks. They might have thought his show was credible because it was simulcast as the morning show on MSNBC. They might have thought Imus was credible because he regularly has guests like Tim Russert on his show, and many political people of both parties appear regularly. That doesn't mean you've actually heard the content of the show.
Most people across the country had never even heard of Imus at all until this controversy.
Joe Biden once said on his show that the TVs in the Senate exercise room were tuned into Imus . Obama is not dumb, he knew who Imus was. The guy has been on MSNBC for 10 years, if a Senator or someone in politics did not know who Imus was then there is a problem.
Yeah. I knew who Imus was. I didn't know everything he said though, and I had no idea he made remarks like these until he said "nappy-headed ho's." I've only been with media matters for just a couple of months.
Just because you appear on their show it doesn't mean you can't speak out against them when they are wrong.
I'm in the same boat. I'd heard of Imus, but only because I'd surfed past him on occasion on MSNBC. I think I'd heard he was outrageous, but I couldn't figure out how that crusty old bore I saw on MSNBC could have anything to say I'd be interested in hearing.
If everyone in the US Capitol had their TVs tuned to Imus, then why was it such an affront for someone on a book tour to go on his show? Clearly, Imus had some influence.
Over in another thread, Right Wingers are lambasting Democrats for not appearing on Fox News Channel. So if they don't take a stand against something they may or may not know about, Democrats get dumped on. If they DO take a stand against something they DO know about, they get dumped on. This is just another in a long line of Right Wing talking points targeted at defaming a candidate rather than making any real point.
How the hell did the print get so tiny when I block the quote?!?! I did the
I meant to say I did the "blockquote" tag. What happened?
Darn it! And it was my excellent point! =)
I haven't figured out the formatting of this thing, either. Ran into the exact same problem last week.
Didn't Obama just become a US Senator this year though? They might not watch as much Imus in the Illinois state house.
"Oh please, if a candidate or his staff is that clueless as to where he appears, then how prepared is he to lead this country?"
-----
I don't remember you bringing up this point when Stephen Colbert was invited to give the address at the White House Correspondents Dinner. Colbert was vetted by the White House, and was accepted because they thought his O'Reilly-like character was real.
I don't want people running my country who can't understand humor and don't know who they're inviting to an official function.
That makes about as much sense as your mindless babble above about Obama, doesn't it?
Haha! ETRWN (Easy to Refute Wingnuts), I actually find it hilarious that there are conservatives out there who think that Stephen Colbert is real! I saw that from bloggers on newsbuster.org (the conservative version of Media Matters). They were like, "Oh come on! How is Colbert not a conservative?"
By the way, ETRWN, great point you made with the Stephen Colbert analogy. Yeah, so according to Tommy's logic, President Bush is not prepared to lead the country or another to democracy simply because he didn't know that Stephen Colbert was actually just a "mock" conservative.
I highly doubt that Obama would give speeches that match KKK agendas, Tommy.
Besides, being prepared to lead a country and knowing EVERYTHING about a radio host is an apples to oranges comparison. Besides, Bush never gets tough questions. He knows where to appear, that doesn't make him prepared to lead the country though (or to lead another country to the path of "democracy").
I think Obama was the one to bring down Imus, because nothing happened until Obama spoke up.
It wasn't last summer, it was right after his speech at the Democratic convention and it was one time. Look Peg I had stopped watching Imus myself because of the racist bits usually done by Bernie who truly has a problem with people like me. I decided not to subject my self to racial insults during morning coffee, but as far as I can gather Imus had never been suspended or punished in anyway in the past for his bad remarks. He was never put on notice about his bad behavior and that of his cohorts. I thought the two week suspension was a start and was sufficient. They could then see if he cleaned up his act and if not then fire him. I am certain despite what the MSNBC big wigs say the fact that sponsors pulled out was the impetus for the firing.
Lynn
I believe it was last summer, that was when I had my knee operation and was watching Imus every morning and became even more repulsed at him . This comment about those wonderful girls was disgusting but he has been doing so many other hateful things, the "cardinal" the attack on Mayor Nagin.
Doris was it the Best of Imus, those are repeats that are shown when the crew is on vacation. I saw Obama on CNN this morning and unless I comepletley misunderstood what he said, (I was making coffee) he said he had only been on the Imus show once and it was right after his speech.
Lynn
I am not certain, but I thought it was promoting The Audacity of Hope, which came out in October but maybe earlier. Either way I do not blame Obama for going on the show, because Dodd, Kerry, Lieberman,Biden, Mccain and Schumer have been doing it.
do you mean back in 2004? as far as I know or can find it was just after he was elected that he was on the show. Not sure how much of a 'staff' he had then, but you seem to assume you know everything, so you tell us.
Obama appears on Imus over the summer after Imus made this terrible comment about Senator Clinton.
Harold Ford Jr Appeared throughout the campaign
Dodd announces his Presidential Campaign on this show , after he makes this statement that MMFA documented.
Yet now Obama is upset? Where were these people when he was saying these things back then?
http://mediamatters.org/items/200605250001
When exactly did Obama appear on Imus? All of the references I've been able to find so far are vague, varying from "last year" to "two years ago."
Hey Christian, I personally heard Olberman say he had made a concious decision not to appear on the Imus show and had not been on that show since the late nineties, and I personally heard Obama say he had been on the show one time right after his speech at the 2004 presidential convention to hawk his book. Peg's new here she'll realize that the posters usually come to these boards with facts and not stuff they heard through the grapevine.
Well Peg, Obama was lying because it was the summer of 2006 not 04. He was all over the place last summer selling his book.
Why would Chris Dodd announce his campaign on that show?If he was so terrible for so long?
Why would MSNBC tolerate this?
Peg or maybe I misunderstood him, and if I did please accept my apology. I'll check the transcript of the CNN morning show to verify this, because it might be that I came in the middle of his interview. Either way I've always been completely amazed at the caliber of people that did the Imus show, and they are still mostly defending him like he’s their crazy old harmless Uncle Joe.
Last summer to promote his book.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/04/10/MNGMEP5Q251.DTL
even though it is not recorded anywhere else seemingly and no details provided it is likely he did go on a book tour his publisher arranged. I have not seen his contract for the book so I do not know how tightly he was required to go on any program they arranged for. Do you for an absolute fact?
I see where that says "last year," but nowhere does that say last summer. So, when last year? I'd like a specific date so that I don't have to guess who is correct...i.e., last year or two years ago?
I don't understand this article or the Boston Globe one at all. Each quote that MMfA used WAS pointed at Obama, whether in proper noun form or pronoun.
The Boston Globe article is another example of media making news rather than reporting it. Sigh.
And what blacks were alarmed?? Imus has now been dealt with, no need to ask EVERY black-heritage person what they think...
And what blacks were alarmed?? Imus has now been dealt with, no need to ask EVERY black-heritage person what they think...Mr. L
I agree Mr. L yet just yesterday MMFA posted a thread wondering WHY Tim Russert hadn't checked in with an opinion:
Imus regular Tim Russert yet to speak out on racial slur-Wed, Apr 11, 2007 7:41pm EST
So YOU tell me why the double standards?
Wait, "Nappy Headed" is a racial slur?
So you've been... where? Under a rock for the last week? Or two hundred years?
Explain how it is so racist?
No. Learn for yourself. Go say it to a black person and discover first-hand for yourself.
I have black friends and they could care less, when it is coming out of MY mouth.
So nobody was offended? You're right. Let's put him back on the network. It clearly wasn't racist.
Sheesh. The word "nappy" is in the dictionary. One of its many meanings is "kinky". Now while it is probably technically accurate to say that some African Americans have very curly hair, even perhaps "kinky", the usage of that phrase over decades and even centuries has given the phrase a slur connotation.
EVEN IMUS admits it was racist.
And as though the "racist" part of it wasn't enough, he called the entire, second college women's team in the country a bunch of whores, and essentially compared the two teams based on their "f*ckability".
Something tells me if he'd said something like that about your sister, daughter, or mother, you'd have punched him in the mouth.
(Second BEST college women's basketball team, that is.)
"EVEN IMUS admits it was racist."
What if he did not say it was Racist?
Would I get violent? No.... Unless, there where direct threats involved. My skin, as well as my sisters, is a bit thicker then you give credit for.
Okay, you wouldn't have gotten violent.
But we're caught up now? You understand it was racist? As was the "j*g*boo" comment that came right on the heels of NHH?
Jeter, I'm not saying this is a double standard, I'm saying this *news report* is not news... it's asking stupid questions, that Obama ALREADY answered, and seems to imply that because he's not AS vocal as Jackson and Sharpe, he's raising eyebrows of others... THAT is not news, that's throwing a net into a swamp and looking for ANYTHING that can be spun to look bad for Obama... if the *news report* were FAIR, it wouldn't worry about JUST Obama, it would ask ALL presidential candidates...
Mr. L,
I think we're kind of agreeing but not getting it that we are ;-)
I don't believe that anyone Black, White, Politician, or Journalist NEEDS to offer an opinion on Imus...unless I suppose someone happens to ask them.
Obama was not obligated to weigh in on Imus, just like Tim Russert was not. So I don't know why MMFA put up a thread wondering why Russert hadn't commented. And now they are carping about a Boston Globe article that is doing the same thing...except about Obama.
So when you wrote: no need to ask EVERY black-heritage person what they think
I simply offered that I agreed, and the same could be said about Russert or any one else.
Jeter you are absoultely correct, but the globe is calling him out for not commenting when he actually did.
And 'Alarms some blacks' is misleading, because the article didn't have more than one person wondering about it... certainly no alarm...
Monk,
The way I'm reading this article is that they [Boston Globe] are saying it took Obama 5 days to comment, not that he didn't. And they are being critical of why it took him that long issue a statement. Or am I reading this wrong?
Maybe that is a fair assessment, but if Obama would have came out swing ing right away the same folks would be pegging him with Jackson and Sharpton. IS it wrong that he took five days to say something? He didn't need to say anything at all if you ask me.
But for the most part I am in fact in agreement with you.
I don't know how often Russert has been on Imus, but it sounds like he was a "regular". Far cry from someone who has appeared once or twice -- or never.
I was pleased when Olbermann finally explained his silence on Imus.
Damn the one night I missed Olbermann and he explained his silence on Imus?!?!
Mind giving me a quick summary? :-)
I posted the exact words he used (TiVo rules) in another comments area around here, but I'll paraphrase as best I can from memory.
First, he pointed out that it's been (to his memory) since 1998 that he (Olbermann) has appeared on Imus' program, and that was because of the offensive things Imus has said and says about various people.
Second, he said that he reason for not commenting on this particular issue (until that night) or on Imus in the past was best explained by stealing a phrase an ex-colleague of his used to often say: "It's not my day to run the network."
Why would Obama get upset over "Nappy Headed H@e". Can someone explain to me what "Nappy Headed" means? I know exactly what hoe means.
Nappy head refers to the texture (Kinky, fuzzy) of hair usually referring to black people. If Imus simply said they had nappy heads, this whole discussion would be different.
I do not get it. How is it any different?
He called the women Nappy haired whores. Most people took the comment as referring to the balck women on the team. So he basically called the black women on the Rutgers basketball team a bunch of whores. There are white women on the team, but I don't think he was referring to them when he said nappy, but I could be wrong.
That hardly sounds racist to me. Very very disrespectful indeed, but far from racist.
So is your argument that msnbc was not justified for firing Imus for saying something "Very very disrespectful indeed"? Or that Obama isn't justified for being offended that Imus called bunch of talented, educated and accomplished young black women a bunch of whores?
I said what I said. Please do not put words in my mouth.
You did.
"
Why would Obama get upset over "Nappy Headed H@e". Can someone explain to me what "Nappy Headed" means? I know exactly what hoe means.
Itried, but you didn't get the point. I give up.
Correct me if I am wrong as I have not bothered to memorize the quotes, but I think it might be more accurate that Imus said "They looked like..." rather than saying "They were."
IMUS: That's some rough girls from Rutgers. Man, they got tattoos and --
McGUIRK: Some hard-core hos.
IMUS: That's some nappy-headed hos there.
And what if he said they looked liked whores, is that any better?
I stand corrected. I guess I shouldn't have been so lazy.
As for it being better, it might be, but not much. I deplore the comments he made. My impression was he was insulting their looks not their race. It was a cheap shot. I have no sympathy for the man. I think his comments were mean, uncalled for, and mysoginist. I am not convinced they were racist even though the use of black slang was used. Racial? Yes. Racist? I'm not convinced.
However I think the NBC and the advertisers are taking the cowardly way out. It seems to me they would rather get rid of Imus rather than use his remorse to make things better.
"Racial? Yes. Racist? I'm not convinced.
However I think the NBC and the advertisers are taking the cowardly way out. It seems to me they would rather get rid of Imus rather than use his remorse to make things better."
Fair enough.
While NBC might do things on occasion to, in their opinion, "make things better", that isn't the purpose of its network.
And at this point, if MSNBC / NBC wanted to "make things better" why would they employ Imus to do that?
I should say, not their primary interest in running the network. It is, for better or worse, to deliver eyeballs for advertising.
Monk it was the old one two punch we get when people want to insult us. Guys like Imus and Bernie will make snide remarks and use crass references to demean women all the time but when the women is Black they usually come up with something specialized just for us. It's like the ghetto s-lut statement made by Boortz. Boy oh boy was that a one two punch or referring to Gwen Ifill as the cleaning lady. That old nasty mix of sexism and racism whipped up just for us. Kermit the frog said it best when he said "it ain't easy being green", and Gwen Iffil stated very accurately in her recent op-ed, that contending with these kinds of insults has actually strengthen us.
Preach................
What Imus said was terribly racist and sexist. As I have doubts about just how really heartfelt his apology is, I would probably fire him if it were my decision.
However, would people and the media please stop trying convince the Rutgers' women they've been permanently scarred? and could we get back to this matter of people dying in Iraq?
Why not fire all those rappers that say vial things about balck woman? I hear more racist hate spewing out of black rappers about black woman than even the some backwoods aouthern boy. Would you agree?
Fine. IF the Record producers and labels decide to fire them for that so be it. There has been plenty of outrage over derogatory langauge in hip hop. Just like there are those that don't think what Imus did was a big deal, there are those that feel the same way about the rap world. What's your point? Are you saying there isn't any dialogue in the black communtiy (for that matter the commnity at large) about the negative images in hip hop?
Well, I see a double standard. The leader of the Basketball team held the mic just like a rapper. Where did she lern that? Probably watching rap videos. Would you agree that most young kids listen to rap and hip hop? What they hear from them is much worse. People of their own color calling woman Biyat@#s and Hoes and even Ni@@@@. After hearing one pathetic rap song, hearing "Nappy Headed Hoe" should be no big deal. Unless, you are told otherwise. I really do not think those girls really gave a crap. But someone, changed thier mind.
"Well, I see a double standard. The leader of the Basketball team held the mic just like a rapper. Where did she lern that? Probably watching rap videos. Would you agree that most young kids listen to rap and hip hop? What they hear from them is much worse. People of their own color calling woman Biyat@#s and Hoes and even Ni@@@@. After hearing one pathetic rap song, hearing "Nappy Headed Hoe" should be no big deal. Unless, you are told otherwise. I really do not think those girls really gave a crap. But someone, changed thier mind."
You make a lot of a$$backward assumptions abut the ENTIRE AA community. I was realy trying to help you understand, but you don't seem to want to meet me half way.
You make a lot of a$$backward assumptions abut the ENTIRE AA community. I was realy trying to help you understand, but you don't seem to want to meet me half way.
No, you did. I said, "most kids".
I did not say "most Balck Kids"?.....Learn to read.
"Learn to read."
-----
I can. What are "Balck kids?" Learn to proofread.
pettttttty
Many kids listen to hip-hop and rap, but they also listen to hip-hop and rap that ISN'T sexist or demeaning (De La Soul, Nas, Black Eyed Peas, etc.). And to say 'well, they HEARD those bad words before, so they SHOULDN'T be offended now' is a horrible argument... If I called you stinking, fat-*ss, dirty little ho, do you think you SHOULDN'T be offended if you heard it again...?
No, I would not be offended to the same extreem.
"Are you saying there isn't any dialogue in the black communtiy (for that matter the commnity at large) about the negative images in hip hop? "
Honestly, I am not sure. Is there?
yes, do dome research. The fact that you seem to assume there isn't says a lot.
Will do.
If you don't think that dialogue exists, you're not paying attention.
Paul Mooney said that the N-word shouldn't be used anymore, this after "Kramer" lost it at that comedy club.
After this latest Imus incident, Sharpton was asked about this issue on Countdown and said he would in fact be pushing for African Americans themselves to stop the use of such demeaning language.
But if you agree that kind of language is bad for rappers, then why are you posting these ridiculous questions about whether or not this was racist?
I am curroius to view others opinions.
I simply do not care about Racist this and Racist that. Call me what you want. I know exactly who I am, and will not let racial slures bother me. I believe as adults, we should be able to take it and let it go. Just one mans opinion.
Do not confuse what I am saying above with a direct threat.
It's great that you've risen above it.
Fact is, this country hasn't. Racism remains a huge issue. And having it promoted, albeit inadvertantly and stupidly by someone in a position like Imus' former position, is something we can do without.
And please stop with this "can we get back to the issue of people dying in Iraq?"
If you're unable to hold two separate concepts in your mind at one time, that's your problem. I think a lot of us are totally capable of processing two, heck, even three different ideas and issues in our brains at once.
Race is a big issue in this country. While Imus' career may suffer as a result of his blunder, it's always good to raise the issue to the top of the news cycle now and then to draw more attention to the inequality that is deeply felt by a significant portion of our citizens.
Sadly, much like the Iraq War, unless something unusual happens, neither issue makes the top story of the day. And sadly, the death of a dozen or more people there doesn't amount to much of a story anymore, nor do most of the racist acts that occur daily in this country.
I think I saw this on planet earth the other day... A school of sharks turns on one of their own...
The media/entertainment complex is corrupt. Imus is being eaten alive by his own company in hopes that they will not become the next target of those race baiting Ministers and their willing allies in rival media.
We all know that the media industry is rife with songs and videos and commedians who glorify mysogyny, racism, drugs, casual sex, gambling, violence, and lawlessness. (I'm sure there is more...)
Will we see anything being done after Imus is eliminated to stem these how these corporate machines spew out their immoral moneymakers and shapers of society? I wouldn't bet on it. ;-)
Are you saying that there hasn't been an effort to clean up the media in congress and across different communities?
Does the fact the the Imus story got a ton of attention, nullify the fact that there has been a movement to "to stem these how these corporate machines spew out their immoral moneymakers and shapers of society" for some time now?
My criticism is aimed at the corporations not the organizations that are trying to hold them to a higher standard.
I remember all the grief Lynne Cheney took when (correct me if I am wrong as my memory may be playing tricks on me,) a few years ago she proposed a rating system for recordings or trying to influence media moguls to clean up their act.
And who can forget the derision Dan Quayle received when he took on "Murphey Brown".
Has the tide turned? Are things going to change?
Maybe the tide is turning. People shouldn't be discouraged from trying to make a difference.
I don't want to see all offensive langauge banned, but I do believe the networks and airwaves should have better standards in some instances. As a matter of fact I don't want anything actually to change about what should and shouldn't be said, I just want more people to stand up to what they find is wrong. I think the Networks had the right to fire Imus for what he did, my whole thing about this incident isn't Imus' reaction or punishment, it's all the people that are saying people shouldn't be offended and Imus should have to face any consequences from the public. He a grown man who said a dumb thing, let the chips fall. Personal accountability, let him make his case and let the public decide. I think Jackson and Sharpton Jumped the shark (is that the correct term), but people have a right to be outraged, advertisers have the right to pull ads and the net work has the right to can him quite frankly.
Tipper Gore was one who was trashed for proposing a rating system. Cheney may have done so as well, but Gore was in the early lead on the issue back in 1985. The effort resulted in the pinnacle of "did I just see that"-edness when Frank Zappa, Dee Snider, and John Denver teamed together in opposition to the group's proposals and testified before the Senate. (The trio later went on to a successful career in crime fighting.)
But if any good did come of it, it's that Sheena Easton's "Sugar Walls" received the critical attention and acclaim it truly deserved.
From Wikipedia, the one and only source of all true and undebatable knowledge in the known universe:
The Parents Music Resource Center (PMRC) was an American committee formed in 1985 by four women: Tipper Gore, wife of Senator and later Vice President Al Gore; Susan Baker, wife of Treasury Secretary James Baker; Pam Howar, wife of Washington realtor Raymond Howar; and Sally Nevius, wife of Washington City Council Chairman John Nevius. They were known as the "Washington wives" — a reference to their husbands' connections with the federal government. The Center eventually grew to include 22 directors
Sorry Bitter I didn't get as far as your post, we posted the same thing.
Yeah, but I was funnier. =)
It was Tipper Gore that proposed that and she did take a lot of grief for it. I agreed with her. I remember the good old days of rap. During it’s infancy I was a young woman in my late teens/ early twenties. At that time the raps were either comical or about partying or they were serious social commentary. Sometime during the nineties the gansta rap usurped the other stuff and they lost me. There are still some decent rap groups out there but I find the gansta rap vile. ([link to en.wikipedia.org] style="font-size: 11pt">
This is all such overblown non-sense. It's disgusting that Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson are the leaders of this mob given their history of inflamatory remarks concerning race. And yes I've heard this isn't about any one person it's about usng the airwaves to spew hate.
It was an incredibly dumb thing to say, but Imus has been doing the same routine for years. The same as Mark "The Moron" Levine, Sean Hannity and other onthe far right. They are all hipocrits.
And the fact that the black communty saying that Obama isn't black enough just hurts them. It sounds stupid and narrow minded.
I also think this is goign to help drive a wedge between the races. Maybe it was invisible and there already, but when I hear people saying that the way to fix this is to get more black faces in front of and behind tha camera it makes me furious. What about all of the black news people and profesionals who have EARNED their place in all areas of work. How many times have they been accused of giving in or being to white.
We need to see people as AMERICANS and we ned to forgive those that make mistakes WHEN they truely repent. And Imus is repentant.
Sorry for the ramble.
"And the fact that the black communty saying that Obama isn't black enough just hurts them. It sounds stupid and narrow minded."
Oh dear, that sounds like something straight off of FOX News, and we know how much in tune they are with the Black community (GOP propaganda outlet that they are)
You gotta do better than that..
Do you think not acting black enough is a good thing. What does it mean? What is black enough. I'm white and really do not know. Enlighten me.
By the way I hate Fox News. I'm a Democrat and proud of it. But I draw the line at the double standard for anyone - right or left.
"Do you think not acting black enough is a good thing. What does it mean? What is black enough. I'm white and really do not know. Enlighten me. "
Again who are the people making these comments? Whose been saying these things? I'd really like to know. Are you saying that if Obama wins the primary Blacks are going to vote republican? Was there some suvey that went around where black respondents claimed Obama wasn't black enough? Please enlighten me!
"And the fact that the black communty saying that Obama isn't black enough just hurts them. It sounds stupid and narrow minded."
Where are people getting this "fact"? Why do 3 or 4 people represent the black community? There is historical evidence that supports the claim that the black community doesn't support (or trust) republicans. I wasn't in the meeting whe we all agreed Obama wasn't black enough. I never actually got around to finding out who has been spreading this rumor as fact. Could someone helpe me out on this?
Now, monknj80, you should know that people are going to downplay this to the fullest and try to say it's all the rappers fault why a old 67 year old white man said "nappy-headed hos." Then they'll have idiots like Joe Scarborough making wide sweeping generalizations that ALL Hip Hop is "gangsta rap" and that's all rappers talk about are bitches, hos, money and respect. It's rappers and white liberal critics fault why Don Imus and Bernard McJerk said "nappy-headed hos" and lost his job, didn't you know?
You are right, what was I thinking?
You lost me there...
Looks to me like you two made a cheap shot at the expense of people who are pointing out the obvious. What is your point?
If Imus is guilty than so too are those offensive rappers, and commedians and other shock jocks.
pardon my poor grammer... *sigh*
The last sentence should read, "..then too.."
argh! "then so too.."
"If Imus is guilty than so too are those offensive rappers, and commedians and other shock jocks."
Ok, I agree and I actually think Preston agrees with taht statement and I don't see anything in his comments that would actually contradict what you are saying and if there is please point that out to me.
I disagree that two wrongs make a right. Imus is a grown a$$ man who said what he said and should live with the consequences. Rappers should be called to task as well as I've said repeatedly, neither should be excused, but the people blaming the "Imus" incident on the black community and "some " rappers are dead wrong and I stand by that.
Monk,
I agree, it isn't the black community's fault that Imus opened his big mouth - he is solely responsible for what he says. But on the other hand, this incident should be in proper perspective as well.......Imus' racial slur is far less injurious to black people and women than the disprespect both are given by certain rappers. They need to stop hiding behind their "art" and take responsibility for the stuff they put out in their recordings as well.
I completely agree and if at some point I gave the impression that I felt otherwise I apologize. I was pretty sure I was saying the same thing you just said.
"but the people blaming the Imus incident on the black community and "some" rappers are dead wrong and I stand by this"
Monknj80, you are completely correct.
I wanted to find the time when Clarence Page had Imus swear not to use racist remarks about black people and only use black people to parodies of black voices. The year was 2001. Clarence Page was nor longer asked to appear on the show and Imus's pledge was broken. Imus admitted to Mike Wallace a few years back that he hired his staff to make racist jokes www.onthemedia.org.
Mike Wallace: You told Tom Anderson, the producer, in your car coming home that Bernard McGuirk is there to do "ni**er" jokes.
Don Imus: Well I've n-- I never use that word.
Mike Wallace: Tom?
Tom Anderson: I'm right here
Don Imus: Did I use that word?
Tom Anderson: I recall you using that word.
Don Imus: Oh, okay, well then I used that word, but I mean -- of course that was an off the record conversation -- {LAUGHTER}
Mike Wallace: The hell it was!
I will still accept his apology because that is what we as humans should do. Initially I was unsure if he should or should not be fired however after the above statements by Imus he should have been fired a long time ago. He was not just making a comic statement that got out of hand this is the way he refers to black people off the record. The way you speak in private is usually the way you speak in public when you mouth gets away with you.
(sarcasm)
Hey Monk, you mean you didn't get the memo? You know, that memo that says everything that goes wrong is our (read Black community) fault??
(end sarcasm)
Looks to me like you two made a cheap shot at the expense of people who are pointing out the obvious. What is your point?
And what is the obvious, pray tell? That all of our entertainment exhibts the same type of vulgarity as gangsta rap?
Anyone who understands Hip Hop culture and listens to rap music can say that ALL Hip Hop isn’t degrading to women, and ALL rappers did not call women “hos.” Much of the good stuff is in underground rap, not the mainstream stuff that’s complete pop garbage and sensationalistic, much like all of popular, mainstream entertainment. And if these folks who continue to use rappers as scapegoats as to why Don Imus said “nappy-headed hos,” then they need to point out the obvious that these “gangsta rappers” emulate most of what you can find in other forms of misogynistic, violent, homophobic entertainment like The Godfather, Scarface, Goodfellas, Casino, The Departed, Pulp Fiction, etc. Should we be singling out Martin Scorsese, Brian DePalma, Quentin Tarantino, etc., for giving us films that reflect a dysfunctional society and culture that's a reflection of urban society? Our entertainment is filled with vulgar, sexist, rebellious, anti-social messages, yet to single out rap as the only art form that carries this is disingenuous.
What I find even more hypocritical is people like Joe Scarborough will sit there and scream about how “black men” are degrading their women and making money off it, yet he did nothing but cried in tears by replying clips of Donald Trump making the same type or sexist and vulgar statements about Rosie O’Donnell. Oh, but it’s only those “out-of-control savages” (i.e. black rappers) who are sexist and degrade women for cheap, easy entertainment. My bad.
I'm having a hard time wrapping my brain around this whole thing. In some aspects, I think it's overblown. in another, I think I'm in no position to judge because I belong to neither of the minorities to whom Imus' comment could be offensive. I did, however, find an interesting column which seemed to me to reflect the reality of it better than anything else I've read so far:
http://www.counterpunch.org/jw04122007.html
In particular, the middle part where she defines the difference between Lenny Bruce and Richard Pryor as compared to those more contemporary "shock jocks". It's my suggested link of the day.
Neo, that essay by JoAnn Wypijewski rocks and I agree with every single word of it. I especially agree with her the difference between Chris Rock and Richard Pryor when they use racial material. I'm a big fan of Counterpunch and think Alexander Cockburn is one of the best political minds we have in journalism today. Glad you posted that article.
"What I find even more hypocritical is people like Joe Scarborough will sit there and scream about how “black men” are degrading their women and making money off it..."
I hate that stereotype. Some Black men degrade their women, some white men degrade their women. What's with all of these sweeping generalizations?
It's disgusting that Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson are the leaders of this mob
a) it's not a mob
b) They're not leading anything. They have their views, as do many, many others. That their opinion is similar to the opinion of many people on this issue doesn't diminish that opinion one bit.
No really, I love lamp.
Oh Tommy & Friends. They Criticize Obama For Going On Imus, Then They Call Him A Coward For Not Wanting To Appear On Fox Because He's Afraid Of Tough Questions. No Response Needed Tommy
I have no idea what your point is, but the two comparisons you make are totally unrelated. These politician are free to choose where they want to appear, but most do so very carefully in order to promote themselves in one way or another.......as do most guests, I would imagine.
Think About It. All These Posts Are Ripping Obama For Appearing On Imus Because Imus Is Such A Jerk. You Are The Same People Who Want The Dems To Debate On Fox News " To Get The Message Out." Yet Appearing On Imus Doesn't Qualify As Dialogue With The Other Side In Your Minds. Typical Repulicorp Double Standard.
I never ripped Obama for appearing on Imus - what I said was that Obama had no problem appearing on his program to promote his book, during which time Imus was engaging in insulting slurs all the time. Now when Imus goes too far and his ship is sinking, all these sanctimonious politicians want to throw him off the cliff - when he isn't politically expedient anymore.
Imus Is A Repub. If Anyone's Throwing Imus To The Wolves It's You Guys Not The Dems. Dems Can't Jump Ship If It's Your Ship.
Tommy,
Slightly off-topic but I'd like your opinion.
IF Imus had referred to Condi Rice the same way he did this college BB team do you think anyone [like Sharpton or Jesse] would have said a word, or even noticed? And would MMFA have cared?
And would anyone wonder what Obama thought about it?
I would hope that there would be the same response. As much as I actually don't like the women, there is a line I think shouldn't be crossed.
Monk,
I'd hope the same thing, but I have a feeling it would have been ignored [except by maybe by Fox, Limbaugh etc]
I don't think there would have been an outcry to fire Imus, though a slur is a slur no matter who it's directed at.
I'm no Imus fan [never have listened to the guy] and I'm not gonna defend him, what he said was uncalled for and racist. But it does trouble me that the media & others seem to indulge in *selective outrage*.
Nay,
You're wrong on that Jeter. When things like this happen it is quite unifying for us. Even when we disagree politically we all know exactly what the sting of racism and disrespet feels like and it's a tie that binds. There is young AA lady that use to be to be one of Trent Lott's speech writers extremely conservative almost in wing nut land if you ask me.. Shes been all over this, she related how she has received e-mails calling her the n-word and dissing her kinky hair. These experiences go beyond political ideologies.
Lynn,
What about when certain black conservatives are called "Uncle Tom" types, or "sellouts"? Isn't that equally offensive as a racial slur?
What about when certain black conservatives are called "Uncle Tom" types, or "sellouts"? Isn't that equally offensive as a racial slur?
I know I'm not Lynn and you weren't asking me, but I had to answer this. Nine times out of ten, it's not white liberals who use such terms as "Uncle Tom" and "sellouts" when you talk about the likes of Sowell, Williams, McWhorters, Peterson, Thomas, etc., it's among us blacks, and it's usually referring to them being race-traitors and making easy money trashing their race to appease the racist side of the Right. Not all black conservatives are called "Uncle Toms" by liberal blacks; there are black conservatives who did not take the cheap way out by making easy money trashing and condemning their own people (usually the working-class blacks). There is no racial superiority or antipathy involved when a black calls another black a "sellout.”
I never said it was white liberals who use those terms.
What do these people, you refer to, specifically say to trash and condemn working class blacks?
I never said it was white liberals who use those terms.
I know you never said it was white liberals who use those terms, I’m TELLING YOU that it’s usually blacks, so how can it be racist intent when those who do use those terms that are directly aiming at people in the same race? I don’t think you understand what “racism” really means.
What do these people, you refer to, specifically say to trash and condemn working class blacks?
I’m not about to dissect arguments made by these hucksters. I’ve been writing and debating about race all day about this Imus topic, so there’s no need to critique arguments by the likes of Sowell and Elder as to why many folks in the black community view them as Uncle Toms. They have nothing to do with this Imus or this subject.Can't read your answer - too small
[cont'd] What do these people, you refer to, specifically say to trash and condemn working class blacks?
I’m not about to dissect arguments made by these hucksters. I’ve been writing and debating about race on the net all day over this Imus ordeal, so there’s no need to critique arguments by the likes of Sowell and Elder as to why many folks in the black community view them as Uncle Toms.
Not giving a concrete example of your assertion does nothing to prove your point.
Preston I’ll try this again, We've had some real heated debates here at MMFA in the past about the term Uncle Tom. A lot of folks here consider it a racial slur, particularly the conservatives. They believe it's something that we AA Liberals tar AA conservatives with because we disagree with them politically and I guess they believe we’re punishing them for not towing the line. I have explained my feelings about the term and I still do not consider it a racial slur. It is descriptive of a certain of behavior that isn't unique to the AA community but a phenomenon that happens among oppressed groups and it happens in other cultures. Those groups internalize the negativity about their own group and they began to really believe in the superiority of the dominant and often oppressing group. They actively try to endear themselves to that group because #1) they want to show that they are not like the others in their inferior group and #2) they generally really worship the dominant group. I have met Blacks like this in my life time and it's actually a rather sad thing to see. I'll relate a litter antedote from my youth. When I was a college student I worked part-time in a movie theatre. This was before the dominance of the multiplex theatres. There were still pretty ornate big screened movie theatres and the doormen wore those fancy smansy jackets. The theater was in what was then becoming decaying downtown area and the neighborhood at that time (this was the late seventies) had become Black. Most of the staff were young Black college students working there part-time, but most of the door-men were old Black guys some were retirees and the like and of course the clientele was Black and they lived in that neighborhood. Well these old guys had grown up in a very different world but there was this one doorman in particular could accurately be described as an Uncle Tom and that's actually what we called him behind his back. I wouldn't dare say that to his face. I was 18 and he was deep into his 60's and I was taught not to disrespect my elders. He worshipped White people and told me point blank that White people were smarter than Black people. He was very negative about Blacks in general. On occasion the regional manager who was a White Guy in a suit would visit the theatre. There was a management company that owned several of these old ornate movie theatres and anyway he would show up periodically and tell us all what a good job we were doing and blah, blah, blah. He actually was very encouraging to all the college students there and asked about our studies, etc. Well this particular door-man would go into a happy Uncle Tom routine that was so embarrassing. I hated when the regional manager came and this guy was on duty. That said I liked this doorman, he was a nice man but he was an old pathetic man that had internalized the negativity he had been taught about our race.
Tommy stop trying to change the subject man. You know that we have a real difference of opinion about the term Uncle Tom and I won't go into that again with you, but if someone calls Clarence Thomas a nappy headed hO WE would protest it vehemently, okey doke.
Lynn, I think you're referring to Amy Holmes, right? Yeah, despite the fact I disagree with her with almost everything politically, I think she's a pretty fair black conservative, especially on social issues. If only Larry Elder, Thomas Sowell, Armstrong Williams and Jesse Lee Peterson could be like her. She's a prime example of what I think a black conservative should be, she doesn't engage in any of that "bash my own race" politics to make easy money with the Right. I respect that about her.
When white liberals criticize a white conservative is that "bashing their own race" too?
When white liberals criticize a white conservative is that "bashing their own race" too?
Now you’re just being oblivious and asking stupid questions. Whites who share political differences rarely make their arguments “racial” unlike black conservatives who condemn poor inner city blacks to make easy profit from a Right Wing demographic that's predominately white. You’re distorting my words and asking silly questions, Tommy; please stay on the program.
I didn't distort anything, I asked you a simple question.
Exactly, how are black conservatives making their arguments "racial"?
Exactly, how are black conservatives making their arguments "racial"?
Because many of the ones that I just mentioned are hucksters who pander to the racial fears and hatred held by many whites, particularly those on the Right.
As I've always said, if you want to make a lot of money, write a book slamming blacks, as a group, and peddle it to I-shall-be-like-the-Most High-conservatives. You will have an instant best seller in that you'll justify their illusions and assuage their guilt. I am convinced that the concept of blackness, throughout American history, is just that. Imagine racializing white crime and saying all white males are serial killers, drunk drivers, child molesters or poor at sports. Imagine, after that, building a whole set of perspectives and selling points around those concepts, sitting down with an agent, and writing a whole book on how bad whites are. Then imagine a whole media, large constituency, a government, including the judiciary, legislative and executive branches supporting you. These are the ingredients for success in an America full of narcissistic, self-righteous and disingenuous whore mongers seeking the dollar and selling their souls. Don't bother arguing with such books, it is futile. This game started hundreds of years ago and will only be directed towards blacks. Some will come out regarding illegals, but only Hispanic illegals. The fact that many immigrants come from Europe, Africa, the middle east, only Mexicans will be targeted. We are in a period in this country, ney, this world, of a sort-of dark ages. The loud mouth and arrogant rule. The spiritually bankrupt, racists, black and white and others, Dinesh Sousa for example, have the floor. It turned out that the media lied about the conditions in the Super-dome after Katrina, but a misguided man like Jesse Lee Peterson blasted a whole race of people based on an already biased point of view. Forget all of the facts of other races, of depraved human nature, regardless of race. Simply attack the black race. slander them, malign them. generalize and disparage them and you will make it as an author and pundit. Unlike whites, Jews, east Indians, chinese, Japanese and Arabs, blacks have absolutely NO back up, no posse and no one to intervene except a few white and black antiracists (Tim Wise and Michael Eric Dyson comes to mind).
Now does that answer your question?
BTW, here's one of Jesse Lee Peterson's classic remarks that just make hardcore racists like Jared Taylor, David Duke and Steve Sailer grin and nod in agreement:
"About five years ago, in a debate before the National Association of Black Journalists, I stated that if whites were to just leave the United States and let blacks run the country, they would turn America into a ghetto within 10 years. The audience, shall we say, disagreed with me strongly. Now I have to disagree with me. I gave blacks too much credit. It took a mere three days for blacks to turn the Superdome and the convention center into ghettos, rampant with theft, rape and murder."
Do you really think so Lynn? I just can't see Al or Jesse getting involved IF it had been a Condi Rice that Imus slurred.
Of course like Tommy pointed out Condi is a public figure. I'm not sure we should let it slide because of that. But I think it would have.
But I guess you & I have to disagree occasionally ;-)
First of all the media and Whites keep Sharpton and Jackson front and center. They run to them when they think they have made some racial gaffe, and the camers show up whereever they venture. Now I respect the old school civil rights workers beause they paved a smother road for me, and I am grateful to them. Nevertheless, I don't always agree with these two and frankly nobody held an election and made Jackson and Sharpton our official representatoives to the world.
You Are Right. But What Are You Saying They're Ignoring To Report On This?
It Would Have Been In Bad Taste Of Course. What's Your Point? If Imus Had Said Something He Didn't Say About Someone He Wasn't Talking About What Would MMFA Have Done. Come On!
It's called a hypothetical.
Posters offer them here all the time.
What's your problem?
Here's A Hypothetical For You. If T.V Dems Refered To Colin Powell As A Halfrican Would The Only Place You Here About It Be On MMFA? The ASWER IS NO. It Would Have Been A National Story Just Like This One.
Trust me. Minor correction - ff Democrats make an inappropriate comment, slur, remark, or anything resembling such - you wouldn't hear about it here.
Trust You. LOL! Okay. It Would Have Been Headlining On G.E...I Mean MSNBC.com regardless of MMFA.
You wouldn't hear of left wing misinformation on a site covering right-wing misinformation? The hell you say.
Now you're getting the hang of it lowball ;-)
But as Tommy pointed out if the Democrats had referred to Colin Powell as an Halfrican it would never show up here at MMFA. Or anywhere else for that matter because I don't think a Democrat would ever refer to Powell that way.
At least not in my hypothetical world ;-)
Jeter,
Interesting question - probably not. But I think the reason is that Condi Rice is a public figure, these basketball players are not. They have not injected themselves into anything and did not deserve Imus' slur in anyway.
Now, I don't believe Condi would deserve it either - but public figures are used to getting skewed by radio hosts and others, they need to have thick skin and get over it - for the most part.
What I am fairly certain is that the outrage from some on the left would be far less loud than it is now, because of their seething hatred of Rice.....however, many principled and reasonable people from both sides are sick and tired of this stuff permeating our airwaves, it contributes nothing and further coarsens us.
But as in this instance, the marketplace usually takes care of these things themselves - Imus has been soundly punished, maybe too much.....but the last thing we need is any government intervention on free speech.
Good point Tommy, Rice is a public figure. Of course that means that we have two different standards in judging whether uttering a slur is punishable or acceptable.
BTW, CBS just fired Imus.
"but the last thing we need is any government intervention on free speech. "
I think it's a little too late for that hope, thanks in no part to such things as protest zones at political conventions and such. When you have the FBI going to visit with individuals who criticize King George..
Oh, i forgot - of course - Conservatives know best... how stupid of me..
You're just plain insulting. I think a good number of us would be just as angry about such a comment. Many of us might not agree with Rice politically or strategically, but those disagreements are about her horrible policies, not her race.
I think you owe a lot of people an apology.
Who proposed government intervention other than you?
Indeed - they're the same persons that "assume" that just because Jackson or Sharpton open their mouths they automatically speak for the Black community.
But they hate it (or worse, they just shut up and say nothing) when Beck, Limbaugh, Coulter and the rest of the right-wing screed monkeys make some off-color crack and it gets thrown back on them that those individuals represent the Republican/Conservatives in this country.
Pretty much sad all the way around - We really don't have any compassion or caring for our fellow people anymore. Welcome to the market-driven, corporaton-controlled society, I hope you free-marketers/uncontrolled capitalism types enjoy this world you've made..
If you consider my remarks off-topic, just think about it for a minute.. I'm sure it will hit you..
I suppose I should make it clear at the start that I am not an Obama supporter.
That said, the Boston Globe seems to be getting a thing about Obama, just like it's had about John Kerry. (For reasons that have never been entirely clear, the Globe is known locally to be hostile to Kerry - and no, I do not mean the Boston Herald, I mean the Globe.)
In March, the Globe published an article about Obama having paid some old parking tickets in Cambridge dating from the time he was a law student there. It opened by saying he was "no longer a scofflaw, at least in Cambridge."
As I noted at the time, in that very article the Globe openly admitted that since January - before Obama formally declared - it had been actively looking for some "violation of local law" he may have committed nearly 20 years earlier. Apparently the most minor of violations, including unpaid parking tickets and not being quick enough out of the gate to condemn Imus to suit some, is going to be grist for the mill.
I don't think its off topic. Imus is a minor battle. He's a shock jock. Sexism and racism are just one of a number of topics you can shock people with. Some of our more serious subjects spew it daily as a main theme. I would hope these more serious types will get some closer inspection. Both by the public, as well as it can, and by the money people.
My favorite part of this Imus trainwreck is the screeching from the talk radio crowd.
I was listening to Severin and he all but had imus nailed on the cross, with thorny crown and all, dying for those who seek the truth on the low end of the am dial. The truth is that if all talk radio has to stand on is racism, sexism, party loyalty and homophobia then maybe it is time for that media to die out. You can argue against Obama without calling him a "halfrican" and you can debate Hillary policy without calling her a Bwitch.
the ludicrous rappers do it too bit is stale as well as they bleep that shizz on the radio all the time, hell even at Walmart
and the comparison to the Duke case is even lamer, but the very best was the Why was no one this outraged at insults launched at W bit
Hey, Imus may be gone (no loss, I'm sure) but the Corporate Media were already unhappy with his occasional intransigence: see the US Atty dismissals, Wisconsin not going down on a "close call" because he did go after the Governor despite the apparent lack of evidence. so now they get the best of both worlds, the righteous indignation mode, and the ability to pick a successor who will more faithfully tout the Corporate lies.