Malkin to Fox News guest: "Oh, geez. Here we go with the 'blame whitey' again"
On the April 12 edition of Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor, guest host and Fox News analyst Michelle Malkin discussed with black talk-show host Opio Sokoni the decisions by MSNBC and CBS Radio to cancel their broadcasts of Imus in the Morning after host Don Imus referred to the Rutgers University women's basketball team as "nappy-headed hos." Malkin accused the media and civil rights leaders of a "[d]ouble standard" and asked whether Imus' remark wasn't "a drop in the ocean compared to the filth on music and radio and hip-hop stations every day." After Sokoni said that those making money from hip-hop music are "[w]hite people that you coddle to in almost all your articles," Malkin responded: "Oh, geez. Here we go with the 'blame whitey' again. Blame whitey." Malkin added: "Whose mouths are the words coming out of? So, Snoop Dogg doesn't bear any responsibility for spreading this filth? And Young Jeezy, and Crime Mob and all these people, they don't bear responsibility? It's all whitey's fault?"
Earlier in the segment, Malkin mocked the comments of one of the Rutgers players who said Imus' remarks "scarred [her] for life." Malkin stated: "Please. Scarred for life is what the innocent Duke lacrosse players are."
In the same segment, Malkin noted that Revs. Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson had led protests against Imus and asked: "When was the last time Al Sharpton or Jesse Jackson looked at the top of the Billboard hot rap tracks charts? Just look at it this week. Every single one of the top six songs has the N-word, the H-word, the B-word. When was the last time that Al Sharpton said anything about it? Was it two or three or four years ago?" In fact, Sharpton has frequently called for a crackdown on vulgar language in the music industry, specifically rap music. For instance, while giving a eulogy at the December 30, 2006, funeral for James Brown, Sharpton emphasized his last conversation with Brown, in which Brown told him "to fight to lift the standards back." From the eulogy:
SHARPTON: It was the last conversation we had. He said to me, "Reverend," he said, "I've been watching you on the news. I want you to keep fighting for justice. But I want you to tell people to love one another. I want you to fight to lift the standards back." He said, "What happened to us that we are now celebrating from being down? What happened we went from saying I'm black and I'm proud to calling each other niggers and hos and bitches?" He said, "I sung people up and now they're singing people down, and we need to change the music."
Sharpton made a similar argument in his own words on the November 3, 2006, edition of CNN Headline News' Glenn Beck:
SHARPTON: Well, let me say this. And again, now Jay-Z I think has done a lot of good things. But those that use the "N" word, if they're black, white, whatever, are wrong. And a lot of us have used it in private. It's wrong. To pass it down to our children is wrong. We cannot, in any way, try and romanticize or sanitize a word that is absolutely racist.
From the April 12 edition of Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor:
MALKIN: In the "Impact" segment tonight: the lowdown on the ho-down. That's the subject of tonight's "Talking Points Memo."
I don't feel sorry for Don Imus, but Al Sharpton and the race hustlers make me sick. Thanks to Imus' big mouth, racial hype, hysteria, and hip-hop hypocrites are running wild. And selective tolerance of hate-mongering continues.
The Rutgers women's basketball team didn't deserve to be disrespected. No woman deserves that. But the milking of this story is getting ridiculous. One of the athletes claims she was scarred for life by Imus' comments. Please. Scarred for life is what the innocent Duke lacrosse players are. Every racial vulture out there wants to feed on the Imus corpse. These exploiters have no shame.
[...]
MALKIN: Double standard. Come on. Look at what you listen to on the radio every single day. You know, what Imus said, isn't it a drop in the ocean compared to the filth on music and radio and hip-hop stations every day in this country?
SOKONI: No, it's not.
As a matter of fact, there are people in the hip-hop community all over the place that are outraged by a lot of the misogynistic and violent lyrics that -- that are portrayed. There's a balance campaign that is led by the Zulu Nation that you never hear about, because it's not newsworthy.
But there's a difference between an artist and someone who has presidential candidates on their show. You know, and, again, you guys continue to repeat the lie that the black community and people like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson are not outraged and they don't fight against it. They fight against this every single day. As a matter of fact --
MALKIN: When was the last time Al Sharpton or Jesse Jackson looked at the top of the Billboard hot rap tracks charts? Just look at it this week. Every single one of the top six songs has the N-word, the H-word, the B-word. When was the last time that Al Sharpton said anything about it? Was it two or three or four years ago? Yes.
SOKONI: No, not two, three, four years ago. As a matter of fact --
[crosstalk]
MALKIN: Really? I didn't hear him. I haven't heard him complaining about "This Is Why I'm Hot."
[...]
MALKIN: Whoa. Whoa. Whoa. Whoa. Let me ask the question. Why has there been so much tolerance for the stuff that is on the charts right now? These songs have been on the charts for the last nine, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 years. There's Snoop Dogg. Guess what? You know what his defense was and his attack on Imus was? That it's OK for rappers like him to use the word "ho" because it's coming from his mind and his soul.
Do you agree with that?
SOKONI: No, it's not OK, although, as an artist, you know, he can make that point, where Don Imus can't make that point.
MALKIN: Wait. Wait. Hold on. You have said -- you have said this several times now. Because it's art, it's OK to demean and insult women, to treat them like meat, to parade them on their videos half-naked?
That's OK, because it's their art, because it's their culture? That kind of moral equivalence is why this stuff is so prevalent right now.
SOKONI: It's not OK.
MALKIN: And it's not something that -- you can't tune it out. You can't just turn off the radio. It's everywhere.
SOKONI: Michelle, it's not OK. And people are fighting against it, like I say. You can argue that it's OK, as an artist, but it's not OK.
Again, you know, Reverend Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, they don't own the top 10. You know who makes money off of those -- those top 10 songs? White people that you coddle to in almost all your articles. That is who makes the money.
MALKIN: Oh, geez. Here we go with the "blame whitey" again. Blame whitey. What about the -- what about who is coming in --
[crosstalk]
SOKONI: Who is making the most money off -- who makes the most money, Michelle?
MALKIN: Yes.
[crosstalk]
SOKONI: Michelle, who makes the most money?
MALKIN: Where are the words coming --
[crosstalk]
SOKONI: Who makes the most money off these shows?
MALKIN: Whose mouths are the words coming out of? So, Snoop Dogg doesn't bear any responsibility for spreading this filth? And Young Jeezy, and Crime Mob and all these people, they don't bear responsibility? It's all whitey's fault?
SOKONI: They don't make more money than [Jimmy] Iovine, Tommy Mottola, and Sumner Redstone. They don't make more money than whitey, as you would say. They don't make more money than them.
MALKIN: Oh, give me a break.
"Please. Scarred for life is what the innocent Duke lacrosse players are."
Oh no you didn't.
I would say being falsely accused of rape while certain groups "representing" the "victim" in this case hold news conferences declaring your guilt before any trial, is pretty scarring.
Being a 17 or 18 year old woman and being called a whore on a nationally syndicated radio show would also be quited "scarring"
The girls never heard of IMUS...Sharpton is a race hussler.
Nah, that YOU
LOLOLOL.. peanuts by comparrison.
Evillib, is that you?
I'd recognise that "LOLOL" anywhere...
Maybe EL had to, "run to the hills..."
Black men come
on his tv
cause him pain
and misery
MMFA CUT OUT THE PART WHERE MICHELLE'S GUEST CALLED HER A "POLITICAL PROSTITUE."
MMFA: YOU HAVE NO RESPECT FOR YOUR SUBSCRIBERS!!!!
I think Michelle is a political ho. No doubt about that.
It was actually Black Panther leader Malik Shabazz that called her a political prostitute. Nice. It was Black Panther Nzinga who stated to Hannity and Colmes that there were 2 Americas. One black, one white, and that is how those who agreed with him liked it.
No, it wasn't.
Olbermann even named him worst person in the world. Too bad MMFA is a arm of the democratic wing.
MMFA CUT OUT THE PART WHERE MICHELLE'S GUEST CALLED HER A "POLITICAL PROSTITUTE."
MMFA: YOU HAVE NO RESPECT FOR YOUR SUBSCRIBERS!!!!
sorry, didn't mean to hit the post button twice, problem w/ the browser.
Problem with the idea, too.
I would say being falsely accused of rape while certain groups "representing" the "victim" in this case hold news conferences declaring your guilt before any trial, is pretty scarring.
- tommy / Friday April 13, 2007 04:15:25 PM EST
Gee, a lame attempt to change the subject is so unlike you tommy.
When exactly did the Rutgers Women do so much as the equivalent of hiring the strippers, tommy-boy?
Wait, so now consensual sexual encounters in the privacy of your home is illegal/wrong. You libs have to at least stay consistent.
They didn't deserve any punishment. period. you're a disgrace.
"Wait, so now consensual sexual encounters in the privacy of your home is illegal/wrong. You libs have to at least stay consistent." --ldoren
You realize there is a difference between "illegal" and "wrong", and yet you seem to conflate the two in your strawman. What the boys did does not appear illegal, but that doesn't mean it was necessarily morally upright.
I have often argued that the media should not be allowed to mention on-going cases until convictions are announced. No one has seemed to care all that much until now. Maybe Liberals and Conservatives can stop bickering long enough to reform the way the media insinuates itself into these stories. Nancy Grace is one of the worst offenders at this. As a former prosecutor, she automatically assumes everyone charged of a crime is guilty.
My point is that the stupid bloggers and the wenches on the View think the boys are still "vile."
No, they are not.
They had consensual relations behind closed doors and almost went to jail for 30 years.
Liberals are a bunch of hypocrites, when they tell everyone to stay out of their bedrooms, but then condemn all men who pay for strippers.
Wait a minute. Consensual relations? Paying for strippers? Isn't that the same as prostitution. If they paid for a stripper and ended up having sex, well....
I'm not hammering on the laCrosse players mind you, I am just asking you to clean up your argument. Not that paying prostitutes is bad, heck look at Limbaugh he's paid well. Based on your post though, it is no stretch on my part to conclude that those boys hired a prostitute. Technically, that is illegal. I must be wrong, they didn't get charged for that.
BTW, if you're wondering. Prostitution doesn't bother me. I think prostitutes should be offered the same benefits to which any any working American has access. I think they should unionize. That's somewhat beside the point, I just included it to show you I'm not hung up on the whole bedroom thing you're grousing about.
I think they should unionize, too.
I can see it now, with their goons twisting arms to make ALL women join, since all can meet at least some of the unionizability criteria, and all of course benefit from the union's very existence (making it that much more wonderful to be a woman). And ALL men will benefit, too, because the union doesn't just care about quittin' time and payday--it cares about professionalism.
In fact, I can even see their name taking shape....it'll be the AFL-CI-**'s.
There are some liberals who are against prostitution and stripping (as you are vaguely describing it). I am not against it. If you want to buy a hooker or a stripper, then you should be able to have at it. I understand there are those that object and that is cool, too. People can offer up their opinions on morality and you can take it or leave it.
Do you feel the same about homosexuals and their right to do what they want in their own bedrooms as a check of your consistency on the matter? If not, why do you decry some supposed liberal inconsistency on the matter?
They didn't deserve any punishment. period. you're a disgrace. - ldoren1626
-----------------------------------
They didn't get any punishment moron.
Really,
Oh I see, so being paraded around as a rapist for a full-year. Having a prosecutor getting on the air, calling you a rapist is not a punishment.
These men will always be associated with rapists. The Duramn dirtbag should be put in jail.
Tommy, you're right. It was shabby that those white boys were convicted in the media before their case even went to trial. That was wrong.
Nevertheless, it is equally shabby that those young female athletes were publicly demeaned by Imus using crude racist and sexist language.
If you're outraged on behalf of those young men wrongfully accused of rape, then you should be equally outraged on behalf of those young women that were referred to as "nappy headed 'ho'es." Perhaps you'd agree that ALL newscasters and political pundits should be held to higher standards and accountable for what they say.
Wrong, newscasters should have high standards and be held accountable. They deliver the news, and we rely on that source to let us know what is going on around us. It should be unbiased and without opinion, it is simply to inform. This is where things have gone ridiculously awry. A pundit, political or not, is an opinionist and not an informer. Why should they be held to higher standards and be held accountable? An opinion is a person's view or belief. If we were all to be held accountable for our opinions then we would be living in Communist Russia or Nazi Germany. Get a grip, and stop making this a Left/Right thing. The left is just as guilty of idiotic opinion as the right.
SAVE DEMOCRACY, VOTE FOR A DEMOCRAT!!
Question: Is Michelle Malkin making a defense of Imus and his remarks?
Question:Is Michelle Malkin making a defense for Imus to keep his 1.5 million listener on the public airways?
For if she makes these arguments the audience should wonder as a whole why she would be making these arguments as a woman of color??!!
I'm Irish, some would say white, but I dare say I would not carry the water for O.J. Simpson who was one of my alltime favorite tailbacks!
How do they find themselves making arguments to defame their own kind??? That is a woman of color in America! I have a hard time with a "Fox News" logo next to that woman!
The Fairness Doctrine, please!!
Happy Thoughts;
Dan Grady
I'm going to make an exception to my "only Savage boards" rule here.
1. Liberals want the Fairness Doctrine because they're incapable of succeeding on talk radio in a free market. Why do liberals need equality on the radio when they control the media anyway?
2. Media Matters is hypocritical for not pointing out how rude the man was to Malkin in the interview.
3. Malkin blew a golden opportunity to point out Sharpton's and Jackson's hypocrisies of attacking racism when they're racists themselves. Michael Savage would have mentioned that. That's why Malkin is no Michael Savage.
4. Although Media Matters has quoted Sharpton as saying that he's trying to fight against vile rap lyrics, it's obvious that nothing will come of it.
5. People should stop referring to Sharpton and Jackson as "Reverend." Sharpton doesn't have any legitimate divinity degree. Neither of them supports Christian moral values. Both of them are anti-Semites.
6. If Rutgers women's basketball players actually feel "scarred for life," then they're pretty pathetic. How can a person be scarred by a petty insult from a nobody on talk radio? The Duke lacrosse team actually was scarred for life by being branded as rapists when they committed no such crime. Those boys may not be moral, but they're not rapists. To compare the two situations is utterly laughable.
You shouldn't have bothered making an exception. You showed everyone how utterly clueless you were when you said the liberals own the media. Unless you are starting a career in comedy, then that's funny!
But somehow I doubt that.
Here we go with the "The media are owned by big corporations. Corporations=GOP. Therefore, the media are right wing" argument. Big corporations are not automatically "GOP." The liberal bias of the media is pretty obvious. Is Pinch Solzberger a conservative? Is Ted Turner, who used to control CNN, a conservative?
I have no problem with liberals being on talk radio. However, it shouldn't be forced upon radio stations with the fairness doctrine. (The Fairness Doctrine makes no sense, btw. It assumes that there are only two sides, liberal and conservative, to an issue. However, there can easily be many sides to an issue. Libertarians often have opinions that are held by neither conservatives nor liberals.) The Fairness Doctrine will probably destroy talk radio, as opposed to making it fair, by causing a major ratings drop which will lead to radio stations leaving the political talk format for something else. Liberals need to find charismatic, talented radio hosts who talk about issues instead of just insulting conservatives.
Oh please, stop! Your jokes are killing me! Liberal biased media! Fairness doctrine forces you to listen to liberals! Tooooooo funny!
It is ludicrous to claim that liberals own the media. Dumb really. It is just a rightwing talking point without merit. The media reflects elite opinion, not liberal OR conservative per say. We all saw how the media got right on board the lets invade Iraq bandwagon, while liberals were against it. I have been hearing this for decades yet the media never seems to reflect MY liberal opinions across the board. Only a simpleminded propagandist could really take the liberals own the media stupidity seriously.
Salon,
kinda explains this survey: http://thinkprogress.org/2007/04/16/daily-show-fox-knowledge/
Fox viewers are three times more likely to not know what's going on. How - pathetic, yet true - is that?
Thank God for SavageforPresident.
It's great how nobody was actually able to respond to your arguments.
there was nothing worth responding to. Every talking point he said has been so thoroughly debunked that we'd be wasting time repeating it ad nauseum. You have to be able to think for yourself to absorb knowledge and make adjustments to your thinking based on what you learn, as the study I linked proves, if you watch Fox, you lack the basic skills to do that.
There was a fairness doctrine DECADES before the conservative talk radio phenomena. MMFA does only CONSERVATIVE misinformation and outrageousness if that makes them hypocritical than so is Brent Bozos MRC for only citing LIBERAL media bias.
Innocent?
Rich mostly white lacrosse players throwing back alcohol and partying with black strippers(wonder why they did not request "white" strippers?) and get busted. Such innocence. Poor little rich boys are victimized again.
According to some media reports, the Duke players did request at least one white dancer (and were apparently very disappointed that they got two black dancers.
Careful, your envy is showing..........
Have any of the posters WATCHED the whole segment? Malkin did her best to stand up to an ignorant racist with half a brain... he spewed nothing but hatred and stupidity. For the love of all that is good, PLEASE look at the video. Look at what the guest said. I hope that there is not a single person here supporting his side... he refused to apologize for his racist hatred against the Duke players, and Malkin called him on it. He is trash... she was 100% right.
Malkin isn't even white! Why's she stickin up for Whitey?
LOL, maybe 'cause she's a 'ho? :-DDD
So Snoopy what part of that interview gave you the idea that's it's ok to call anyone a "ho" . Oh, I get it..... you're just a hypocrite like Jackson and Sharpton
I just pasted a link where she was called one, I didn't call her one. I just asked how she liked being called one. BIG difference...
Snoopy, I beg to diiffer, If you notice, your orginal comment that I replied to is missing. Actually, someone flagged it while I was commenting. I wonder why it was flagged? Gee, maybe even MMFA thought it was wrong. Stop backpeddling.
No backpeddling here. I stand by what I said. I asked if Malkin liked being called a whore, and pasted a link to the bradblog. The link had a clip of her thursday night rant where her guest called her a prostitute.
I've seen my posts dissappear in the past, usually because it was the response to it that was offensive. MMFA seems to delete everything up to the post that started the discussion, seen it on several occasions.
Actually I don't really have a problem at all calling a woman a "ho" or a "skank" or any name at all...as long as she is actually acting like one. That is what makes the Rutgers comments pretty bizarre. Imus called these hard-working athletes "hoes" for no apparent reason other than they looked more "street" to him than the Tennessee players. If you call a woman a "ho", you had better have a basis for it or be prepared for trouble. Heck, even if you do have a basis, you are probably in for a rough ride.
Malkin sometimes makes Ann Coulter seem reasonable by comparison. Apparently the troglodytes got some kind of talking points comparing Imus's remark to rap music. While I don't even like rap music, there is a fundamental difference. Rap music refers to generic "hos". Don Imus put the label on specific people.
I'm not promoting the rightness or wrongness of either, but as is their custom, the staunch defenders of the Angry White Male have trotted out another bogus analogy.
I think general/specific is part of it, but even more overriding in my opinion is the issue of who says it and in what context.
For a (trivial) example, sometimes I call my cousin a "dumb guinea" to break his balls. He's not dumb, and "guinea" is almost archaic - however if someone not Italian called him that, I'd think it inappropriate, or even offensive given the tone. Context.
My fiancee and her best friend call each other "hooker." Neither of them is in the sex industry, so I presume it is whatever the female equivalent of breaking balls might be. Obviously, if anyone else called either my fiancee or our friend a "hooker," there would be problems. I am a Buddhist, but she is not, and she fights dirty. Again, context.
Now we know that some black men call women "hoes" that they don't respect. I think that's misogynistic as hell. I don't care about the difference between a b*tch and a lady, that kind of language is BS. But it is a matter for the black community to judge, not me. There are some circles where that is accepted. It is another matter entirely when a white man uses that word to describe a black woman.
Context. Obviously, a very complicated issue that is challenging for our conservative brethren to understand.
I get your point. It's only deemed "offensive" if the person receiving the comment is offended by it. In the case of your fiance and her friend, they aren't offended by being called derogatory terms by the other. I still think it's a dangerous road to go down, giving some people a free pass and others a red light to utter the exact same thing. That situation may not continue indefinitely.
This is an issue where I tend to side with the conservatives, in part, since I feel that it crosses into censorship territory. As a writer/author, words are my paint brush. Sometimes the paint brush is the ordinary mundane speech of day to day life. Other times, it is raw, unabashed and nasty. It sometimes takes shape as ni**er or sp*c or chink (notice how MMFA’s purity filter doesn’t discriminate that word, which is wholly understandable; still it is worth pointing out) because that part of the story requires more than the bland language, PMRC-approved lexicon, which rappers like to think of as THE lexicon, which is fine; to each his own. Yet, as a white man I am supposed to feel more than bad for daring use those words. I am supposed to NEVER use them. Why? Because some bad white people I NEVER MET did bad things without MY PERMISSION OR GUIDANCE, and those words were used by them. So I, by virtue of skin color and ethnic background, am born into villain-hood, and they, the rappers and the entire African-American community, are born into victim-hood. It has to be the case, otherwise why have two sets of rules evolved, one for white people, one for black people? It is intellectually vacuous to pretend that language isn’t the reverse Jim Crow for white America, a very water down Jim Crow, nevertheless the spirit of Jim Crow is there. And before someone gets all pissed off about what I’m saying, let me repeat: I WAS BORN INTO THIS WORLD, I DID NOT CREATE IT. I refuse to adopt the centuries of crimes committed by white people, which is a hefty list. Indians, African slaves, freed slaves, broken treaties with the Indians, Jim Crow laws in the South…OK, Indians and black people, and poor immigrants, many of whom were white. White people are evil, historically. I, however, am not. I did none of these things, I shall never endeavor to do any of these things. I am innocent. So why do I feel so guilty? (Looks at the back of his hand) There’s the culprit. The largest organ of the human body, the source of all evil, one in the same. None of this exonerates or excuses Don Imus’s attack on the women athletes from Rutgers, though. Next time, he should set his misogyny and racism to music, but keep it a-specific because it’s OK to insult everyone at once, just not selectively.
And make sure to charge for it, too.
RandyI'm loving the copy and paste function here. One solid block of text. Ugh.
Randy
That's a thoughtful post but doesn't what Imus said, or any other speaker, have to be considered in the context of intent? Artists, writers and commentators often use language and imagery to convey an objective perception of reality. The sticky part is intent. When questionable language is intended to harm as opposed to reveal then I have a problem.
I know, Don Imus's remark is still reprehensible. Then again, it is neither unique nor remotely limited to white people. People of all creeds and color schemes say horrible things. But the attention paid to what those classifiable as white say is disproportionate with reality. In this brave new world, racism is not limited to white people, and misogyny certainly crosses racial barriers. If just a fraction of the horror expressed over Imus's utterly dumb and ignorant slight was ginned up over the "artistic" blatherings which pollute the radio waves dedicated to music, rap, as we know it, would be deader than Julius Caesar in a fortnight.
Which I don't want.
I firmly believe in exposing ignorance to large doses of sunlight. Like mold, ignorance and hatred grow best in darkness. Is that where we, as a society, wish the racists and sexists would go? To fester, and gather strength, in dark places? Take heart, everyone. With each passing generation, the vilest aspects of the human soul are weeded out. Evolution takes time. Do not chide nor tug at the sprouts of progress for not touching the sky over night. Baby steps, baby steps...
Randy
The only problem with the Fox stance on the Imus scandal is that they are hypocrites, and have tried to silence war critics. However, it is far more complicated than to say Imus stepped over some kind of imaginary line. Conservatives do have a good point about the hypocrisy in the black community, and the answer is not to silence derogatory language by rappers, but to allow whites to use the same words, even in the context of personal insults. What Imus said was funny. I have no shame in admitting that.
You're ignoring the long history of these words being used to hurt and degrade blacks. It's only been in the last generation that it even started to not be "allowed" for whites to use these words in polite society.
I was fortunate enough to grow up in a houseold where such language was absolutely forbidden. To me, it's not even a question of when or whether - I would feel very uncomfortable ever saying any of these words.
And this from someone who uses the F word on an extremely regular basis...
I don't think a whore, or any derivative of the word, has ever been exclusively used against a sole race. I also think that snoop's (dogg) response/excuse for rappers using it was wildly childish - But when it comes down to it, this really is about Imus - And he was wrong - Hell, he admitted that much -
As far as people still trashing the duke guys - for what? They can't hire strippers? Isn't that the job the stripper had? Are we going to put a moral judgment on college kids who like to watch women strip now? Oh, I forgot, she was black - oh my - That changes everything - No way were they innocent kids if the stripper that was hired was black! <sarcasm> Jesus people - If someone over 18 wants to see someone else over 18 strip, that's their damn prerogative. And no moral judgments should be passed by us about it -
With valentinian's comment - Ho is not a black word - It does not denote a race - Ho is a word that I grew up with and that nearly all people in my age range grew up with (at least if they lived in a city). I'm really dumbfounded by how out of touch and completely discriminatory some of you guys are - You act as if you are on a high horse, but yet you are constantly discriminating, you just seem to be unable to see it. Context is a tricky proposition, and one you don't seem informed enough to understand yourself -
To Kerrikins - Be called a name, is not comparable to being accused of rape and kidnapping. It is not comparable to being lashed out against by nearly your whole school. It is not comparable to having the black panthers and Jesse Jackson come to your town trashing you constantly for something you did not do. You really can't see that?
Rufustfirefly - Refer to the above - Now college kids can't see strippers? jeez -
Nerzog - you listen to rap? they refer to generic ho's? lol - get over yourself...
"It is not comparable to having the black panthers and Jesse Jackson come to your town trashing you constantly for something you did not do."--jking
I haven't seen any comments from Jackson that I would regard as "trashing" the lacrosse team. Most of what I have seen has been fairly benign. What comments are you referring to? I won't ask for anything about the Black Panthers as they are a decidedly racist organization to begin with, IMO.
I think the right is largely imagining much of the supposed remarks on the left and it would be nice to quote people directly on this to avoid re-writing history in more stark terms than what really happened.
Did you MISS the nappy headed part of that racist slur? Or are you being purposely obtuse?
I think the whole "Well other people say it, why not go after them too?" is a bad argument. African-American rappers use the term "ho" as a generic term for women they feel horny for or don't respect. But you know what, we expect this from rappers. I don't think that it makes the word any more acceptable. I don't like it at all.
Rappers are held on a lower level than newscasters. We don't listen to rappers for the news. We listen to them for hot beats and rhymes. Don Imus was not a rapper, therefore he had higher expectations. He directly used the term for the basketball players, which was totally uncalled for. What did he have against them?
Malkin falsely states here that black leaders that Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton haven't spoken out against this recently, which is false (notice how she doesn't even let the guy speak when he tries to refute her on that). And for her to say that the one player who said she was "scarred for life" shouldn't feel that way is deplorable. Who is she to decide how one should feel? Just because it didn't happen on the same scale as being allegedley falsely accused of rape, it doesn't mean that the one player didn't have a right to complain. She had every right to say that she was scarred for life! These players are probably not used to any public spotlight, and for them to be defamed like that on a nationwide radio and television program was probably hurtful.
"African-American rappers use the term "ho" as a generic term for women they feel horny for or don't respect." - LOL - you got to be kidding man - so basically your argument is that black rappers use 'ho' for any woman they really want, or any woman they don't want - Wouldn't that be just about all women? lol, come on -
And "African American" rappers? You never heard a white rapper or asian rapper or latino rapper say ho? I really don't think 80 percent of the people commenting here have a clue -
Nerzog,
So it's the specificity that people are objecting to regarding the term "ho's"? Then you would have no problem with Coulter suggesting that all generic Muslims convert to Christianity or we should kill them, or whatever she said? After all, she's not singling anyone out by name, only a generic reference to all Muslims?
I'd say that sort of comment is directed at a community, not a nonspecific individual.
Actually I would think rapper's use of "ho" is directed at unnamed or anonymous women. You don't really have to back it up, because we just have a general idea of who the rappers are referring to.
Imus example was very specific about whom he was calling a "ho". If you call a specific woman a "ho", you are pretty much calling her out in public. If no one knows exactly who you are talking about (as with rappers), you can get away with it.
Tommy, rappers don't use "ho's" specifically for ALL women. Saying "I like ho's" is different than saying "I like women." Many black leaders do not condone the n word and h word being used.
As for Ann Coulter's coment, it is being directed at a group of people. It is not okay. She is disrespecting a religion.
She said, "We should invade their countries, kill their leaders, and convert their people to Christianity."
Onward and upward, that's the ticket.
Malkin knows exactly what she's doing. She's gunning for her own show, bigger book sales, and a bigger house on the beach. She's seen the formula work wonders for the bank accounts of Coulter and Lardball, and she's following it to the letter. Like them, she's willing to hate, alienate, insult, and spread BS in order to get there.
so sounds like this guy called it right thursday night then...
http://www.rawstory.com/showoutarticle.php?src=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bradblog.com%2F%3Fp%3D4401%26print%3D1
Malkin may be another in a long line of rightwing blowhards, but to ignore this guest of hers and his spewing idiocy is ridiculous.
Malkin may be another in a long line of rightwing blowhards, but to ignore this guest of hers and his spewing idiocy is ridiculous.
What would life be without another one of Tommy's "I'm not an ignorant, racist bigot, but..." routines.
And you thought you and jeter had that market cornered. Another raw deal for angry white dopes.
You're right, Tommy. It's all the Rutgers Women's Basketball Team's fault. They've been working on this separately and collectively since they were in the womb.
Sure thing DDandBB.
This is a clear-cut case of Liberal Athletic Bias by taller-than-average women of all races out to make the lives of dumb white dudes more difficult in every conceivable way.
I pitty your ..................
Makes you wonder if she's going to land Imus' vacant spot on MSNBC. Which has me reflecting on frying pans and fires, as in out of the former and into the latter...
Is Malkin going to capture the hearts of male rightwing America with the same fervor as Coulter?
There's a funny reference that comes to mind, but I'm going to get pummeled and have an Imus moment of my own if I use it.
Cab Calloway...
Was an early (the first?) rapper, so lets ban him!
From Minnie The Moocher (1931):
"Hodey-ho-dee-ho"
Disgusting!
Santa Claus said it first. But I geuss I'm back to blaming whitey.
Absolutely and he also sings songs about illegal drugs.
"If he said he walks the ocean, any time he takes the notion then you know your talkn to reefer man."
-Cab Calloway, The Reefer Man
Do you have any idea how much clout Imus and the Duke Lacrosse players have now for being the first martyrs in The War on PC and "Race-Hustlers"? Dudes will still be richer than a few generations of my family combined. Must be nice to be falsely accused...
Michelle Malkin needs to upgrade the CDs in her carrousel. I'm glad I listen to real hip-hop (MF DOOM, DeLaSoul, Tribe Called Quest, just to name a few of the thousands of intelligent rappers the "MSM" will never tell you about); These real artists rarely fill me with the urge to appropriate and exploit their culture. Basically, they just provide me with something to dance and chill out to, not my lexicon for communicating with African-Americans.
Young Jeezy is pretty sick, but he's no Young Buck! Who's even heard of these clowns? Was it the black community that put Snoop up in those Cadillac commercials?
" Must be nice to be falsely accused... "
Really???
"Oh, geez. Here we go with the 'blame whitey' again"
Malkin was absolutely justified in making this remark.
Agree Jeter completely.
Having put the history of racism behnd them, American whites have now decided that any mention of race issues in the modern day is nothing but "blame whitey." Bravo.
Your simplification of this to "any mention of race" is ridiculous. Address the meat of the exchange and you might just see Malkin's point.
The meat of the exchange certainly wasn't what came out of Malkin's mouth. She brought up the top 10, and Opio's only point was, who profits. Not Sharpton, not Jackson, and certainly not the rap artists. It's the record executives.
His point was that they share responsibility, not that the artists themselves have none. It is a totally reasonable, arguable point. You don't have to agree. But any mention of whites by blacks is "blame Whitey." And at that point, reason goes out the window.
Val, If you don't think the "artists" make huge profits out of this, you are mistaken. And it was the guest who was blaming the "whiteys', not Malkin.
I didn't say -and Opio didn't say - that they didn't make profits, only that the record company executives share some of the responsibility. You agreed in a different comment if I didn't misread you.
I did agree to the profits, I don't agree that the rap artists are some sort of victim here and it's the white man's fault they spew what they spew.
He didn't say that - you and Malkin jumped to that conclusion.There is nothing he said that supports that interpretation.
That is exactly what he meant.
What did he say that led you to that conclusion, One-Liner Guy?
Good try. You will never see itmy way, me never your. Two peas in a pod.
"Afreaid of a confrontation?"
"That is exactly what he meant." --EL
Mindreading.
The guy talking to Malking wasn't making them out to be the victim. His point was that you can't just blame rappers for saying the word when record executives don't fire them for what they say.
Misogyny has been around a long time and bandied about in books, on records/cds, in art, etc. forever. The whore/virgin crap has been around forever. This stuff didn't just start because of rap which has been around, what, 20 -25 years? Yeah, let's blame blacks for racism and misogyny.
What about the labels owned by the rappers? No white exec to blame that one on - Well eminem is white I suppose
VAL:
You misunderstand rightwing "LOGIC", as expressed by Tommy and others.
When something bad happens to a white guy (IMUS), and the reason is blatant racism, pundits like Malkin start looking for excuses to blame anybody else. "It's the RAPPERS!" they scream, putting the blame solidly on black folks again, where it BELONGS.
Or, "This was Sharpton and Jackson!", a direct attempt to shift the blame to black people.
Any TRUE search for root causes: historic discrimination and denigration of blacks, MONEY made by the executives who produce the music (perhaps exploiting the artists AND their audience), THOSE facts are not relevant to Malkin's search for someone to blame, because they delve too deeply into a root cause that obviously DOES blame whitey, and with ample rationale. So those reasons must be dismissed, quickly, out of hand, and with a "catch phrase".
Malkin and her ilk are only interested in delving JUST FAR ENOUGH into a situation to extract a root cause that blames the victim, and excuses the White Guy. Anything FURTHER than that self-serving and dishonest and incomplete "search" is said to be "blame whitey".
That's how any conflicting evidence is dismissed. Understand NOW?
Tex:
"extract a root cause that blames the victim"
Que? Rappers that sing about bitches an hos are victims now? She wasn't blaming any victim, she was blaming the crude rappers that degrade women. His twisting of the situation to blame the record execs makes no sense.
And if you watched the entire interview, which MMFA conveniently leaves out, he also blames slavery for the current rap artists "plight" in their lyrics.
Sounds like he is a racist!
You're right. Only racists could possibly even believe slavery even happened. ;)
CON MAN:
IMUS is the victim here. He was led astray by the black culture, which has a genre of music depicting life "in the streets" for mostly urban black youth.
That's the EXTENT of the search for "root causes": Imus LED ASTRAY by blacks.
Of course, blacks are ALSO to blame, victimizing Imus by "making an issue" about Imus' speech. This would be Sharpton and Jackson as the black people VICTIMIZING poor Imus.
Now, what is BEHIND the plight of inner city blacks? What's the history? What causes a culture that would be demeaning to women, in lyric and in fact? Could it be a history of work and home environments springing from decades of exclusion and desperation? Could it be well-meaning economic aid programs that were not available "if an able-bodied man is around"? Such a rule would have the direct result of having black women disclaim their husbands (who perhaps cannot find a job) in favor of government welfare. Those misguided requirements had the effect of destroying black families, and perverting the relationships within the community.
(The help could have been provided without this harsh consequence, but that's another debate.)
That's just scratching the surface of "root causes" which might help explain a culture which has regretable negative aspects, but such a search for understanding is not important to those who simply wish to excuse the white guy by blaming his behavior on blacks.
Malkin's point is crystal clear: Imus was a VICTIM of black culture and then an unanticipated campaign to accuse him unfairly for doing what he's been doing for decades. He was ambushed, and it's unfair, and it's instead the fault of blacks and their culture.
Anything OTHER than that surface shifting of blame from Imus to blacks is information that Malkin is uninterested in, so she labels it "blaming whitey". It's the same VICTIM mentality the rightwing use whenever an average citizen notices that every advantage and every rule and every law is written to benefit our very wealthiest citizens, while the average American's quality of life is worsened. If you dare ask WHY IS THIS HAPPENING, or why the rich-poor gap is widening exponentially due to stark favoritism granted the already wealthy, then you are accused of fomenting "CLASS WARFARE".
Class Warfare is in full battle, and the wealthy NeoCons have been winning big. If you QUESTION the success that billions of dollars and thousands of K-Street lobbiests have had in advantaging the wealthy at the expense of everyone else, then YOU must be the problem. "SILENCE!" bellows the Wizard, "You dare question ME??!??"
Tex, your post was beautiful, and it saved me time writing out a long reply as to WHAT created these urban ghettos in the first place. And now since many of these folks who come from urban ghettos have the mic to speak about their experiences, then we're shocked to hear their frustration and anger, which in many cases leads to violence, in many of the topics they talk about. When excluding the fact why many of them come from broking homes and turn to crime and focusing solely on part of the problem will never get us as a nation where we need to be regarding race relations. . Many of the posters such as Tommy, who is by far the most oblivious person regarding race relations, hides behind old stereotypes and fears and claiming a moral high ground that doesn't really exist. People like Tommy will never resist the easy temptation to condemn others and commit themselves to changing things for the better rather than focusing on the worst and ugliest portrayals of black life in our culture. Conservatives enjoy using buzzwords like “Personal responsibility.” Well, personal responsibility is a two-way street, and one will never succeed without the other. That's why the problem of race is so vexing in America; there's so much anger and fear under the surface and so much that we can't get at through mere words and even the most earnest discussion.
Tex,
As usual, you are so far off base it's ridiculous. Nobody is shifting any blame away from Imus for what he said - where did you get that? What this is about are these terms and where they are perfectly acceptable in some circles and by some "artists", and thoroughly denounced by others. It is an important and valid discussion to have.
Except in your bumper sticker evil rightwing world where you spout your silly, baseless generalizations and contribute nothing. But keep at it, we expect nothing more.
Exactly, even me and all me homies at the Klan meeting all think what Imus said was absolutely abhorrent and idiotic.
Nobody is shifting any blame away from Imus for what he said
Maybe you are not, but many commenters over the past few days have done just that, saying "Hey, <insert name of only rapper I have ever heard of> says this kind of stuff all the time, what's the big deal, it's a double standard."
Reeeeally...?
Most of what I have heard is more like, "Yeah, Imus is terrible for saying this, but where is the outrage from these same people over what <insert name of rapper here> sings? Why Imus, and why now?"
Aye, there's the rub.
Didn't you read the article? There has been outrage by these same people about the same thing from the black community.
Val, I have heard many different people opine on whether Imus should have been fired or not, but no reasonable person condones what he said......even Imus himself has apologized profusely and the Rutger's women to whom his slur was intended, have accepted his apology.
There are always extremes in any situation, you can't use them as any example.
But I do believe that if discussions about race relations and racism in this country are held honestly and respectfully, then some good can come of this incident. That should be the focus now, not Imus.
Tommy, we have gone around and around with this. There are literally dozens of examples of people saying Imus's comment was perfectly OK on this very website. I had a couple arguments in my backyard with very nice white liberals saying the same thing. In addition, there were those who deplored what he said but thought he shouldn't be fired, and people who thought he should be shot.
But a lot of people thought "nappy-haired hoes" was no big deal. It was not an extreme position. Extreme was, "well those girls WERE ugly."
I was posting at Think Progress yesterday and I got a lot attacks from liberals. Some said I took it out of context and I asked them what's a good context for a white man calling black women "nappy -headed hoes". Some said I got an Iraq war critic off the air and I responded "so what". There was this one conservative who claimed that Imus was actually complimenting the women and I asked him what planet you live on.
I'm with you on this. I do not want a guy like Imus on my side, I don't really care what his politics are.
The ends do not justify the means, the ends are the means.
Val, links please!!! You are saying "dozens" and "lots" without be specific (which is what got you all over me yesterday). There may be a "sozens" of posts, but they are made by only a handful of posters.
Fair enough. I don't have the time or inclination to go back and see how many of the posts were by the same people, and whether that skewed my impression, so I will limit myself to saying it seems to me that a lot of people were defending him.
I'm a Black man who sometimes calls his black friends by the N-Word and sometimes they call me the N-Word. I'm not trying to denounce them when I say it and vice-versa. Now if a White person called me the N-Word, I would take it differently because of the history between Blacks and Whites in this country. Most people know this and won't go there.
My sister and her friends greet each other by saying "What's up B*tches". I'm not suddenly gonna go up to me sister and her friends and call them b*tches. If I go there, I'll get a swift kick to the balls.
Loonz, I will give you the racial component within the culture, but that doesn't explain the sexist slurs against women.
-He called them nappy-headed hoes. A white man calling black women nappy-headed hoes is not acceptable under any circumstances. The sidekick calling them "hardcore hoes" was bad enough and then he chimes in with "nappy-headed hoes".
-There is a certain segment of the Black community that accepts gangsta rap. Black women who listen to it and hear these rappers call women hoes, rationalize it by saying "he's not talking to me; he's talking to that hoe over there". And since these women are not offended by it these rappers continue to use it. Anyway, none of these rappers are gonna call a black woman a “hoe” to her face because they know they'll get a swift kick to the balls.
I guess at this point it would not be out of line to ask Malkin and Cavuto and the clan at Fox News why they are ONLY concentrating on gangsta rappers(coincidentally, 'gangsta' is a term adopted from the early twentieth century crime novels and movies)? For every hardcore spitter there are dedicated nonviolent hip hop artists out there. Take a look at Chapelle's Block Party, that movie is about peaceful, racial diversity unified by the universal laguage of music.
These guys are skirting the issue of personal accountability. Nobody made Imus say what he said.
I think it's misogynist no matter who says it, but misogynist and racist when a white man says it to describe black women, and outrageous to me personally when a white man with elite media cachet says it to describe some hard-working come-from-behind black female athletes, who should get nothing but praise. for reaching the finals.
Wow Loonz! I know I'm older but I have NEVER greeted a friend with what's up B. Now my daughter is 18 and grew up during this hip hop error and neither does she. Now I monitored what rap music I let my daughter bring in the house, and the rap lyrics grew worse as she got older so she lost interest in it anyway. She said to me yesterday she really has a problem with the vileness of the gansta rap because it has indeed had such a negative effect. We have 15-20 years to watch how the crassness of gansta rap lyrics and the life styles of many of the artist has influenced everyday life now. I have herd people say that the raps of these ganstas simply reflected their world but it seems to me that the kids that didn't grow up in their world. Our kids are glorifying this now and are trying hard to adopt this thug life style. I look at the little guys in my neighborhood. I mean these are middle class boys that a few short years ago were wearing geranimals. Now they are walking around the neighborhood like they just got our the big house or something. It's disturbing to watch.
I have two brothers (fifteen and seventeen) and both of them dress that way. They want to be "gangsta". Now if you're gonna be gangsta, you'll eventually have run-ins with the cops. My question is: How can you effectively run from the cops with your pant down to your knees?
Which makes me wonder if a more proper punishment for Imus was to have the Rutgers girls line up and kick Imus in the balls.
right - so white people are the problem (you said as much) - It kinda sucks being white huh?
oops - this comment appeared way down the thread from where it was supposed to -
There is something to be said about today's rap - My first cd ever was MC Hammer - Listen to that today and it sounds like pop music, and back in the 80s our whole class was dancing to it every morning before school. But nowadays, and when i was in highschool, rap got violent as all hell. At first it was an expression of everyday life in some neighborhoods... Then all the kids wanted to be badasses like the rappers they heard. Boom, kids getting stuck for their shoes - Looking at someone the wrong way and you get hit - Everyone wanted to be the hardest of the hard. It wasn't because of their neighborhood per se... It was the idolization of the rappers, who half the time are lying like crazy in their songs.
There are real dynamics here at play, and newsflash, white guys are not the root of it all. But keep thinking that and that'll get us real far -
"and certainly not the rap artists."
In the top 10 and making no money? Go back to school.
I don't know, it's kinda funny watching a foreign born fillipino native show so much outrage at how whites are supposedly treated.
Michelle Maglalang was born in Philly.
my bad, I stand corrected. she was born in Philly to fillipino parents who were in America on a work visa. That would explain why she's also against mexicans crossing the borders to have their babies making them legal US citizens.
My father's siblings, first-generation Italian Americans, were rabid racists. It's a very old, old story.
that it is. When I got married, my mom almost died because I mixed our pure white european polish/french/irish genes with mexican genes. Took 15 years of watching our marriage last to convince her she was wrong.
"mexican genes"
That explains your stance on illegal immigration. To bad you are not a free thinker.
Are you a proud bigoted and ignorant or did I misinterpret your post?
Yeah, my Mom flipped out over my Italian Jeans. Sergio Valentes, I think.
Hey Snoopy, you like paying for these poele to have babies?
that has to rank right up there in terms of ignorant. Can you please try to connect the dots?
Classy......
What? It's not "how white people are treated", it is the attitude among many that it is the white man's fault. The guy basically said that it was the white record execs that make these rappers put all the insulting lyrics in (to make money)...
It doesn't have to do with how anybody's being treated, except women.
Who makes the money. That's all he said.
I know... just last week I saw Snoop, 50, Akon, The Game, et al down begging for money on the corner. The execs make money, but the kind of extravagent life-changing money is made by these "artists".
Besides, look at someone (if not the cheesiest example) like Will Smith... both he and the record execs made a boatload of cash, and he wasn't degrading women, etc.
OMFG. The fact that we can't even have a reasonably balanced conversation about this shows the state of race relations in this country.
Yes, the rappers make money, but the record execs do, too - in most cases, more than the artists do. That's all he said.
that's the conclusion i am coming to also. this could have opened up all kinds of discussions on race relations. instead it's another - oh yeah?! well so and so did it too!" so juvenile
I disagree . Using the word "Whitey" is racial. Malkin should know better especially since she is a female of "Asian" decent. She is a disgrace and she should never be allowed to host a show, as bad as FOX Is they cross the line when they allow haters like her to host shows.
How so? She is falsely labeling rap as a purely black thing.
White people that you coddle to in almost all your articles. That is who makes the money.
This comment alone by Opio Sokoni justifies her remark.
Not really.
Did he call her whitey? Did he call anybody whitey? Did he call anybody a derogatory name?
Malkin made an unprovoked leap to stereotyping, not suprising for her. What is suprising is your readiness to defend her.
Stop fighting a battle you CAN NOT WIN
I agree. Malkin was trying to marginalize his argument.
The biggest hypocrites here are Viacom, but they seem to get a complete pass from Malkin for some unknown reason. Maybe she is too sensitive about "blaming whitey".
It is pretty ironic that Viacom owned CBS Radio pulled the plug on Imus considering their blatant involvement of black exploitation in other areas of their media empire.
To be fair I don't like that argument either. It's not the labels fault, but the facts is they do look the other way while they collect their checks. That being said they do not deserve the blame in this instance.
I was actually follwoing Sokoni until she brought that excuse out. Malkin on the other hand was called out on a few thing though and rightly so, as MMFA noted:
(Sharpton and JACKSON still need to make some apologies before I hear another word out of them though.)
Monk,
You make a valid point - many of these record companies are owned by rich white men who market this stuff to blacks and suburban white teenagers who hear this crap.......they are not devoid of any responsibility by any means. Both the artist and the corporation make alot of money off this racist, sexist garbage. It's incredibly sad.
White guy calls individual named black young woman whores. The response is to blame the rappers. And Malkin concludes it's more Blame the Whitey stuff. Completely logical.
Hmmmm. Let's see.... White neo-cons have controlled the legislative branch of our government until this January. They've controlled and continue to control the executive branch and the judicial branch.
America's corporate world is controlled by white guys.
The media is clearly controlled by white men (and I'm including TV, radio, the film industry, newspapers, and the recording industry--which distributes rap).
I'd say that makes white guys a pretty legitimate and rather obvious target. But, hey, let's blame rappers and women athletes for the problems of the world... just for a change of pace! ;-)
"It's all whitey's fault"
She is as bad as Imus . We all know FOX is a horrible outlet but they allow her to spout out her hate is amazing.
What? It being all whitey's fault was his opinion (paraphrased by Malkin), not Malkin's opinion.
She should have reprimanded him for using that term, not repeat it in her vicious way.
He didn't use that term. Good Goddess, the text of the interview is right in front of our eyes!
Of course, he didn't use that exact term, but his point is obvious.
Unless he called anyone whitey in that interview Malkin's leap was uncalled for. She did not have to go there, she could have stated it another way. She raised the spectre of racial stereotypes. Why can't you let her own responsibility for her own words?
So you are complaining about the *term* "whitey". That's your big problem?
Correct, he said "White People". My point was she should not use that type of languge or engage in that type of talk, she should have taken the higher road. Of course she spews hate though.
Afreaid of a confrontation? Think outside the box, for us. Not when it just suits you.
As much as I loathe Ms Malkin...She's right.
I would suggest that any group that excludes another is inherently racist.
Therefore, if one individual is excluded by race from using certain language -- language that is used continually by another race -- then that individual is a victim of racial injustice.
As it is generally agreed, had Chris Rock or Dave Chappelle made these comments, it really wouldn't be an issue. Why? Because a double standard has been allowed to flourish wherein our society has granted one group to exclude another. And when Imus said what he said, he violated that double standard. Something a white male dare not do.
Did Imus say something that was reviled by all segments of our society? No. These are words that a black individual could utter with impunity. What Imus did was commit the unforgivable sin of violating this racially exclusive double standard.
I can't think of a single word I use in my daily life that I would ever deny another to use -- especially based on race.
You see, as Snoop Dogg so eloquently reminds us, the only women who should ever be called a HO are the "Hos in the hood, trying to get a Nigga's money". Thanks for clearing that up Snoop.
He can say that all day long, and it's somehow acceptable. Whereas a white person such as myself cannot. But why would I? It's a horrific racial & sexist slur. And yes, even for Mr Snoop. But he gets a pass.
Imus made a horrid remark. But also made the mistake of using words that fall under the umbrella of this racist double standard. Had Imus been black, this wouldn't be an issue.
Bottom line: Imus is likewise a victim of this insidious brand of racism.
Oh, please. Give the downtrodden white male thing a rest. This is a common phenomenon in pop culture, especially in comedy. I've seen Jewish comedians make fun of Jews, black comedians use the N word, female comedians make fun of women, fat comedians make fun of fat people, etc. It's nothing new and it makes perfect sense. What these people are doing is known as self-deprecating humor. As a society, we view that differently than making fun of someone else's group.
Imus stepped over the line...it's just that simple. Personally, I'm not sure he deserved to be fired, but he's been in the business long enough to know better...he just got careless and paid the price. What happened to him is no different than what happened to the Dixie Chicks, and I've been assured that what happened to the Dixie Chicks was just "market forces" at work. How is this any different?
Nerzog, How is it self deprecating humor only when they are degrading and disrespecting all women with their lyrics?
JT was referring to a "racial double standard". My response is that this makes sense culturally. We, as a society, don't get so defensive when one of our own makes fun of us. Have white Southerners ever gotten angry about Jeff Foxworthy? Maybe it's not "fair", but since when did conservatives care about fairness?
As far as degrading all women, I think you have a point, but I don't think it necessarily demonstrates any kind of racial double standard. Eminem says the same kind of thing in his songs, and I don't hear black activists saying that he can't do it because he's white.
JTWRITERKC6133
Sorry, IMUS IS NO VICTIM!
www.onthemdia.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 off the record conversation-{LAUGHTER}
Mike Wallace" The hell is was!
This was after an on air pledge the Clarence Page swearing to cease all simian referenced black athletes. Ban on all references to non-criminal blacks as thugs, pimps, muggers and Colt45 drinkers.
Imus is no victim. He just got caught!
Any time a conservative says you "don't hear" liberals say something, it's an "if a tree falls in the forest" type of argument. Just because conservatives "don't hear" black leaders denounce vulgar rap lyrics doesn't mean it's not happening. It means that conservatives just aren't paying attention to black leaders, or (even more likely) they're just wilfully ignorant. Just remember, these are the same people who claim that the "liberal" media "didn't cover" the Clinton scandals. These people just hear what they want to hear.
Now, all of a sudden when it's VERY convenient for her, Malkin is a Champion Crusader Against Nasty Song Lyrics. How DOES Michelle find the time for her Noble Cause, in-between bashing Muslims and defending WWII internment of Japanese?? I just don't know.....
Who is blaming whitey? I think the people that are comparing rap music to what Imus said, are really insulting thinking peoples intelligence. I agree with NERZOG. Rap music speaks in generalities unless attacked by someone who attempts to step on the toes of artists trying to make a living. iE. Bill Orielly when he attempted to boycott Pepsi for having Ludacris in their commercials. Ludacris responded to Orielly, not all white people. I think people got it twisted when they think that rap music objectifies women. These women dance in these videos because they are paid to do so. They are not forced. So the songs may be misogynistic. Don't like it. Don't buy it. If hip hop wasn't becoming apart of the main stream then T.I wouldn't be on a Chevy commercial with Dale Ernhardt Jr, or Snoop couldn't get on a commercial with Lee Iaccocca. I just think epople need to wake up. You're not in Kansas anymore.
just for fun, show me where 6 of these top 10 have the words she was mentioning in their titles
http://www.billboard.com/bbcom/charts/chart_display.jsp?f=Hot+Rap+Tracks&g=Singles
Not one of them has those words in their titles. How can she not like this is why I'm hot. He doesn't even curse on that song.
Here are some lyriucs from song 3.
Rich Boy Sellin' Crack Dope (Nword) Wanna Jack CHIT Tight No Slack Just Bought A Cadillac(Throw Some D's On Da B****!!)Just Bought A Cadillac(Throw Some D's On Dat B****!!)Just Bought A Cadillac(Throw Some D's On Dat B****!!
Man, I can not even have a close relation to the words used, this site wont post it.
Lyrics from #2.
Ima Ima Ima Ima flirt Thats right I tell the truth and the whole truth When it come to hoes I be pimpin like i supposed to,rollin em like I supposed to, shinin like I supposed to In the club f****n wit honeys like i supposed to I dont understand when a ni**a bring his girl friend to da CLUB Creppin all ova the floor wit his girlfriend in da CLUB And wonder why all these playas tryna holla at her Just soon as she go to the bathroom ni**a Ima holla at her A dog on the prawl when im walkin through the mall If I could man I would probably flirt wit all of yall Yea- yea homie you say she yo girlfriend But when I step up to her, Ima be like tarzan Believe me maine this is how dem playas do it in the CHI In plus we got them playette foolers in the CHI Now the moral of story is cuff yo bitchI'm black, handsome, I sing, cause im rich and Ima flirt
#1 Billboard Rap Song
Verse 1:This is why i’m hotI dont gotta rapI can sell a mill sell you nothing on the trackI represent new yorkI got it on my backAnd they say that we lost itSo i’mma bring it backI love the dirty dirtyCoz ni**as show me love
Verse 2:This is why i’m hotCatch me on the blockEvery other dayAnother bi**h another drop16 bars, 24 pop44 songs, ni**a gimme what
Again...what do these lyrics have to do with Imus? I didn't see nappy headed hoes in any of those.
What is supposed to be the message in those examples? What are the "artists" trying to say?
She's kind of hot. I've never seen her before.
Oh anyway, I think she crossed the line a bit by oversimplifying things. The CEO's of the music biz who make money of the gangsta rap absolutely are as accountable for spreading that stuff as the rappers are.
But seriously, context is a subjective thing. Imus lived by the sword of shock-jock radio, and has now died by it. Move along. I'm so over this subject.
I thought she was hot the first time I saw her, too. Unfortunately, as soon as she opens her mouth, she uglies up real fast.
I was just about to post the exact thing word for word.
I think that's a common reaction.Fox news has a lot of those "Hot at a glance" women, then it's either their opinions, or the gradual realization that it's a pile of plastic surgery and troweled on make-up you're looking at, that cools things down.
OK, so if it weren't for these evil, manipulative white executives exploiting these naive rappers, forcing them to flaunt symbols of wealth, celebrity and gang life, they would choose to pursue common careers, be responsible parents to their children and demonstrate respect for their spouses?
Hmmmm.
Whitey is truly, truly evil.
You guys have some sort of allergy to any argument that requires analytical thought, is that it?
I agree with you. I hate when people change the subject to make their point when it has nothing to do with the actual topic.
Who invented these hatefull words? Who used them to enslave and discriminate for hundreds of years? Malkin has no idea what she is talking about. These conservative pudants have no idea what its like to be african american. Rappers should be held accountable, but they are not the ones to blame for racism. If Imus is off the air, it is our duty to continue putting heat on racists in public radio untill they are all off the air.
See, this is what I'm talking about. It all sounds like boilerplate bland liberal rhetoric until we get to "until they are all off the air." And there's like a dozen of these guys flying around the posts.
Nobody who posts here regularly is calling for this sort of thing. Brock has his little Enemies List, but he's not calling for people to be fired en masse, just that they tone down their rhetoric.
Is anyone else made extremely uncomfortable by this?
Boycotts in general make me nervous. I don't like the idea of getting someone fired just for speaking offensive words, though it's well within the rights of any employer to do so. I don't celebrate what happened to Imus, though I think he carelessly crossed a line that anyone in public life should be aware of.
I'd like to see Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity out of business for sure, but not because we put pressure on their sponsors. Instead, I'd like to see them become obsolete because their audience finally wakes up and realizes that they are full of crap.
Finally, Nerzog, someone puts my sentiment into words far better than I ever could have done. And add to your own reasons for nervousness my own fear that the replacement for Imus might indeed be someone far worse in terms of being a true right-wing zealot. And as I suggested in a reply far up the string, Malkin might indeed be someone MSNBC might like to have--a racial-minority hard-right conservative. Michael Savage in an Asian-female costume, so to speak...and is that doesn't scare the bejabbles out of you, I don't know what would.
Malkin's ravings getting broader exposure would be the best thing that could happen to the progressive movement in this country, excepting possibly giving Coulter a show...
No doubt the highlight of the show had to be Ms. Malkins defense of George Washington who was a slave owner. Blame whitey indeed.
That was rich - the guest attributed blame to him for the "artists" inner turmoil. Anybody that really suffered at the hands of slaveowners and the degradation and humiliation they endured would turn over in their grave if they heard this guy.
Remember everyone don't dare say "Happy Holidays" that's truly offensive.
I guess we can start calling O'reilly and gang "Religion Hustlers" the next time they start complaining about the War on Christmas.
Heaven help me, the world may possibly be coming to an end, BUT, I actually agree w/ Malkin and think that this quote was definitely taken out of context.
Watching the video, the guest brings up "white people who make the money" when it clearly was irrelevant to the conversation they were having. Thus the "blame whitey" excuse. Sorry, MMFA. I can't defend this one.
And this is coming from a black man. I'm just tired of the double standard. We as a people need to go at some of these artists w/ the same venom that we went after Imus. Then I'll be impressed or feel like a victory has been attained.
Well said........I admire your integrity.
We as a people need to go at some of these artists w/ the same venom that we went after Imus.
Agreed, but only after an artist writes or sings to the masses specifically about Imus. If a rapper called Imus a "ho" and was making money on it, and had the same soapbox, then yes, I believe we should have the same outrage.
A rapper singing about "hos" in general, thats another issue. Degrading, wrong in my opinion, but certainly not one make with a mic calling a specific group of talented people a derogatory name.
Context, people. Context.
Rap is music, it's art, it's like a movie. It may convey images, stories or ideas, but you know it's not real. There's no double standard between reality and fantasy, or art and real life if you will.
In this case, it's real, Imus called individual young black women black whores. If a white man calls a black mans sister or mother a whore to her face, my guess is that the mans response would not be to protest against rappers, or their record companies, or the PUBLIC who buys the cds.
"Here we go with the 'blame whitey' again. Blame whitey." I feel like I'm treading on eggshells here, but... does Malkin realize she's not white? Does she not realize in defending "whitey," she's defending some of the very same folks that foment racism against not just Blacks, but Hispanics, Asians, Women... Or would she contend that such racism does not exist? Or that it's not perpetrated by many of the very folks she deigns to defend? Talk about hypocrisy...
A rapper singing about "hos" in general, thats another issue. Degrading, wrong in my opinion, but certainly not one make with a mic calling a specific group of talented people a derogatory name.
See, this is where we disagree. Degrading black women should be unacceptable, regardless of the degrader's race, class, status, or social upbringing. It should also be intolerable regardless of the degradee's race, class, status, or social upbringing.
As a (relatively) young black man who loves to hip hop (not the mainstream crap played on the radio, mind you), it pains me to see Imus destroyed while many in our culture who do the same thing are celebrated. Deified even (Tupac, anyone?).
In this case, the dude tried to shift the blame to "whitey." I'm tired of that excuse! And I'm glad Malkin called him on it.
Scooter said it was degrading, and Opio didn't "blame whitey." He brought it up when Malkin blamed Sharpton and Jackson, and he said the record company owners were more responsible than Sharpton and Jackson. I think that should at least be a reasonable point for debate whether you agree or not.
He also didn't use the term "whitey," Malkin did.
"Again, you know, Reverend Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, they don't own the top 10. You know who makes money off of those -- those top 10 songs? White people that you coddle to in almost all your articles. That is who makes the money."
Sorry, Val. This quote is irrelevant to the discussion at hand.
She brought up Sharpton and Jackson, the right wing's two favourite bêtes noires, as if they were somehow responsible. He countered by drawing attention to the fact that there are some white men getting very rich off this music, and saying nothing about it.
He was not putting all the blame on the record executives, but to leave them out of the discussion entirely is dishonest in my opinion.
Malkin knocked down any chance of a decent discussion of the issues by injecting the highly-charged phrase "blame Whitey" into the mix. She could have argued her position without race-baiting.
bêtes noires
Oh jeez. Pun not intended. Sorry.
Sorry you didn't stick with BilldO's French Boycott now, eh Val? ;)
Of course, her annoyance is primarily based on the predominant rule in Malkin's world
which states that unless they are (gasp!) liberals, the only people ever guilty of anything are the rest of us lowly darker skinned untermenschen with whom Her Anchor-Babyness does not identify since we have yet to embrace the notion that we are inherently not as magnificent as the assorted racist wingnuts to whom she regularly panders.
Interesting tactic by Fox News here, getting the non-white host to defend not only the white Duke lax players, but also "Whitey" as a whole.
Wildly OT: I think it's kind of funny how she seems to have picked up Yiddishisms from Jesse: "...with the 'blame Whitey again."
I'd like to see her bust out a full-throated "feh!"
I loved this interview because it illustrated how frustrated whites and in Michelle Malkin's case...non-blacks become because black people can say things in a public forum in reference to blacks that others simply cannot. The killer is, we can make money by saying them and white people cannot. It is the chittlin conspiracy: Blacks were given the worst part of the pig and turned it into a delicacy. Now they are called Chitterlings…how sophisticated! These words in question were once used to demean us and we turned them into words of endearment. And yes, whitey has some responsibility. Maybe these aren't the best words that could have been chosen, but that is not to say that racism or sexism is perpetuated because of they were. The “N” word is not a derivation of any Swahili word I know nor were the “b” or “h” words made up on the trip from Elmina Castle. Yet, they want to blame it on hip-hop and not the society that gave hip-hop a reason. Don Imus learned those words in Riverside California where he grew up and not from a rap song. These are words that have made it from cotton plantations to media plantations...oops! Did I say plantations? I meant organizations. Raslyn, Minneapolis, MN
How many people died in Iraq today while Americans argued over a few racist words?
MMFA is pathetic SOKONI called her a "Political Prostitute."
EVEN Keith Olbermann made SOKONI the 2nd worst person in the world.
MMFA is the most dishonest organization on the web. You are all a sad bunch of communists.
I'm a pretty happy capitalist.
You are calling MMFA posters "communists"? Hillarious!
Weren't you the one that was peddling communist propaganda the other day with links to that commie Martin Durkin's "documentary"? Ironic. Ain't it, comrade?
Nice catch, Openmind. I guess a commie is a really bad person who disagrees with it, except when a commie agrees with it.
This is fantastic! It is so wonderful that Malkin displays what ALL immigrant minorities have known for a long time: Black leaders want to blame "whitey" for everything that plagues their community. Republican's are going to come down vehemently harsh on black rap from this point on. LOL. It's about time. Is this what liberalism in America stands for?? Blame the white guy for everything? I want know part of it. I am converting to the Republican party immediatly. Good luck Barrack Hussein Obama! We're going to expose your middle-name and ties to Sharpton and Jackson as well!
. I am converting to the Republican party immediatly. - zamfir273114
Well, I guess the Bad Spelling Party will have to ramp up their recruiting to fill the gap.
no women deserve being demonized except Cindy Sheehan right lil lulu?
No, the Duram Dirt Bag stripper does too.
"And it's not something that -- you can't tune it out. You can't just turn off the radio. It's everywhere."
That's funny I can and I do. What's your problem Michelle, cat got your remote control?
"Whose mouths are the words coming out of? So, Snoop Dogg doesn't bear any responsibility for spreading this filth? And Young Jeezy, and Crime Mob and all these people, they don't bear responsibility? It's all whitey's fault?"
She has room to talk given her filthy war propaganda. How many innocent men, women and children have been killed in Iraq because of HER lust for violence? And she's gonna call Sharpton and Jackson hypocrites? Please, girl. Check yourself.
Weak argument you say, it has as much merit
If you are White, you do not have the right to say anything. If you are Black, you are allowed to say whatever you want because you are suffering so greatly. Snoop Dogg et. al. are crying themselves to sleep at night over the horrors of racism. Rappers are allowed to say whatever they want because White people must be paid back for things their ancestors did hundreds of years ago (even the Whites that fought for Civil Rights).
That does not even deserve a comment!
I wouldn't pay Zamfir no mind, Pearlene, since he has proven to be racist, smug and elitist just like his two idols: Michelle Malkin and Dinish D'Sousa. It's pretty funny how someone of his racial and ethnic decent would come to America, degrade blacks whose people been here since the 1600s, and join other racist elites to degrade and disparage blacks in any shape. But we've seen it happened over centuries when other immigrants come here and embraced by the mainstream to where they have a higher a status than that of African-Americans and Native Americans. This is all part of the America process of winning acceptance and distancing yourself from the minority group that's been downtrodden and excluded from mainstream for centuries. As Toni Morrison once said, they join the elites, point out to blacks, and say "I'm not that, I'm not a part of them," despite they are people of color who also carry many stereotypes which many use to hurt their self esteem.
Thank God we have antiracist white scholars such as David R. Roediger, Matthew Frye Jacobson, Tim Wise, Stephen Steinberg, etc. who'll continue to write books to highlight this part of our country, reminding us that we ALL—especially whites and blacks—have the responsibility to face things that may upset and shame us. However, you'll never here from the aforementioned in the mainstream media since they're branded to be too leftist, and America has a long history of not facing our past injustices head-on and realizing that this history has conditioned us all, particularly white and black. We’re more comfortable of staying oblivious to enlightenment than feeling any shame, sensitivity or responsibility; therefore rather than having an problem-solving discussion about race, refusing to ignore the cause and effect of things, we’ll continue to dance around in circles over this. Dancing in circles will never get us where we should be regarding race relations.
Yea, yeah...just like any successful black person is a racist, right? lol. Most black people that I know simply live their life with the same ups and downs as everyone else; however, there is always the Sharpton's and Jackson's of the Country that want to make black people feel like "victims" instead of just average, everyday people that want what's best for themselves and their family's. Every culture has it's nightmarish past, slavery is ours. The difference between the Colin Powells and Bill Cosby's of the world and the Sharpton's and the Jackson's is that one side has a vested interest in keeping racism alive. You throw racism in the face of White people long enough, they are going retaliate with their own dormant racism.
Yawn. More sweeping generalizations by the likes of a cold-hearted racist. First, Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson are not our leader. Sure, racists and media figures run to them because they have a charismatic presence to get ratings for television, but they’re not our spokesmen. Since you’re Iranian I guess I should say that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is yours, right? That’s why you’re pandering and wallowing to the white conservative elite; you’re praying the can somehow see past your ethnicity and think of you as one of them. Sorry, pal, but the Republican party will never accept you as their own, just like they’ll never accept self-hating gays Andrew Sullivan as one of them, no matter how much you disparage and degrade minorities to reach status.
Furthermore, don’t EVER fix your mouth to downplay the four hundred years of slavery, and then another hundred years of Jim Crow, segregation, and terrorist attacks by the Klan. Until you live in the deep South such as myself and have your uncles, cousins and other members of your family beaten, spit on, degraded verbally, excluded from well-paying jobs—despite being educated—for years and years, then you’ll never understand where our frustration with the mainstream stems from. I’m young, but I still have living relatives who’ve been beaten and degraded when it was legally accepted to do so, and it has scared them for life. So don’t you EVER come to me and downplay one of America’s greatest sins (that and their slaughter of Native-Americans). And you and the Right can continue to adopt Bill Cosby as your personal savoir all you want; he has about as much disdain for the Republican party as the majority of blacks in this country (70 to 80 % of us vote Democratic year after year). Unlike you, Bill Cosby has deep concern for his people, and while me maybe angry—just like a concerning uncle who may get angry with me if I give up on something and feel not to push myself further—Cosby words are meant to uplift and break the psychological chains of slavery, not to stand on some platform and denigrate people that’s been disenfranchised for centuries. His words are not meant to be taken by the likes of you and twist them around to excuse your racist antipathy against blacks. He’s not the first nor will he be the last who has chastised his people; if you knew ANYTHING about black history, you’d know that. Here’s Cosby own words how people like YOU took his words out of context just to create this wedge between blacks:It was the white man who got the word from somebody who was there, who called the white man, who put it in the white paper, which is called the Washington Post. And from that, they left out Mr. Cosby saying 50%. They left out the part about fathering, and they certainly left out 'We've got to take back the neighborhood and the responsibility--take it back.' Then they added something that I think was incorrect, that the people came out stone-faced, stunned. I don't think they were. And I heard the audience a couple of times saying, 'yes,' people applauding.
And if you go back to that video you will see clearly that Cosby took—what we black folks tend to say—that audience to church. They were applauding him because what he was saying were things of empowerment. Yet cold-hearted racists such as you, Buchanan, Limbaugh, O’Reilly, Carlson, Hannity, etc., continue to misconstrue his words so you can refuse taking personal responsibility for YOUR own actions. Cosby has no respect for the Republican Party and in the same interview he said, “I don't give me a blank about those right-wing white people! They can't do any more to us than they've already started with. They can't try to throw us back any farther than they've tried to throw us back. And they're doing a very good job of it. I don't give me a blank about those right-wing white people! They can't do any more to us than they've already started with. They can't try to throw us back any farther than they've tried to throw us back. And they're doing a very good job of it.”
[cont'd] This was the paragraph the appeared in small print:
Furthermore, don’t EVER fix your mouth to downplay the four hundred years of slavery, and then another hundred years of Jim Crow, segregation, and terrorist attacks by the Klan. Until you live in the deep South such as myself and have your uncles, cousins and other members of your family beaten, spit on, degraded verbally, excluded from well-paying jobs—despite being educated—for years and years, then you’ll never understand where our frustration with the mainstream stems from. I’m young, but I still have living relatives who’ve been beaten and degraded when it was legally accepted to do so, and it has scared them for life. So don’t you EVER come to me and downplay one of America’s greatest sins (that and their slaughter of Native-Americans). And you and the Right can continue to adopt Bill Cosby as your personal savoir all you want; he has about as much disdain for the Republican party as the majority of blacks in this country (70 to 80 % of us vote Democratic year after year). Unlike you, Bill Cosby has deep concern for his people, and while me maybe angry—just like a concerning uncle who may get angry with me if I give up on something and feel not to push myself further—Cosby words are meant to uplift and break the psychological chains of slavery, not to stand on some platform and denigrate people that’s been disenfranchised for centuries. His words are not meant to be taken by the likes of you and twist them around to excuse your racist antipathy against blacks. He’s not the first nor will he be the last who has chastised his people; if you knew ANYTHING about black history, you’d know that. Here’s Cosby own words how people like YOU took his words out of context just to create this wedge between blacks:
Paleo-Conservative republicans accept me. The neo-cons do not. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is not the enemy that neo-cons make him out to be.
Paleo-Conservative republicans accept me. The neo-cons do not. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is not the enemy that neo-cons make him out to be. zamfir273114 / Saturday April 14, 2007 03:46:10 AM EST
You can't be serious when you say that, Zamfir. Both Michael Savage and Pat Buchanan consider themselves to be Paleo-Conservatives, and both are very racist towards people who are non-white. Also, Michael Savage has called Mahmoud Ahmadinejad the Hitler of his era, so I wouldn't be so confident if I am you about Paleo-Conservatives not considering him the enemy.
Preston, maybe you shouldn't start the debate, w/ "you're a racist."
I decided not to read what you wrote after that point.
Zamfir, you're a bigger crybaby than LDoren. You're lucky LINDAFRANKE isn't here, she'd bust up yer pity party toot-suite.
"If you are White, you do not have the right to say anything. If you are Black, you are allowed to say whatever you want because you are suffering so greatly."
Sure thing buddy. Just look at how stifled are the likes of Rush "Breck girl Edwards" Limbaugh or Ann "fa**ot" Coulter. Now look at Martin Luther King or Malcolm X...er, wait you can't because these visionary black men were snuffed out for speaking their minds. Wake up, dude. White people say and do whatever the heck they want.
The stupidity of Michelle "Squalkin" Malkin is well known. I can barely stand the sight of her and I love Asian chicks. To equate the words of Don Imus with rappers is beyond moronic because 1.) A rapper is telling a story and as a story teller he (or she) might be telling the story from the first person perspective, as an observer or just making up a character. And by calling someone a "HO" he may even be denigrating the very promiscuity he finds both alluring and repellent. By calling a woman a HO what he's saying is "you're good for one thing (or would that be thang?)". Now if a woman can't listen to that and think maybe I'd better not be cheap because this is what guys think, well maybe she is a HO. I think it's funny that a lot of these rappers are real mamma's boys and would kill if someone insulted their mothers. So they have respect for some women, just not cheap ones. Now as far a story telling goes, Bruce Springsteen has a song, "Reno", about a visit to a prostitute in Nevada. Is he relating an actual event or just telling a story? Since he's still married, I'd imagine the former. But no one is saying he's denigrating women with this graphic tale of illicit sex. He's telling a story about life. 2.) Imus was not telling a story. He was denigrating these young ladies based solely on their appearance. It had nothing to do with their achievement, their athletic ability or their attitude. I was based solely on their race. Would have have said the same thing about an 80% white team? No. 3.) I certainly think the Duke LaCrosse players will be scarred from the case but for life? Please. They have been exonerated and if they aren't already, they will soon be very rich. They'll get over it.
Also, the comments about America's greatest sins by Preston fail to mention America's greatest triumph's. Slavery was not just a black and white issue. It was Africans who sold defeated African tribes to become slaves. And while Slavery has been abolished for over a hundred years (and thousands of white people fought and died to bring it an end) those tribal conflicts continue to this day. And when the genocide in Rwanda was going on I don't remember African Americans doing a whole lot about it. President Clinton called the Rwanda genocide his greatest failure as President and, quite honestly if he'd been pushed on it harder by black leaders in this country maybe he'd have done more. Maybe they were doing that and I just missed it but I don't remember it. And today, I hear more from an Irish rock star-Bono-than from any black leader about things in Africa and in the African-American community than I hear from any hip-hop artist and that's sad.
Now as for the Indians, I'm sorry but I disagree with calling a generic slaughter of Indians one of America's greatest sins. It wasn't as if they weren't fighting back. The Indians were just over matched by a technologically superior force. Had they had the means to defeat and slaughter the "invaders" they would have done so. Warfare was a way of life for many Indian nations and just because they lost doesn't make them victims. They battled; they lost. And quite honestly, if the Indians had won they would not have been as merciful as the Americans were. They would have wiped out completely the vanquished armies and no white people would be left on this continent.
So let's not just talk about the sin's of America. Sin is universal and injustice comes in all colors.
Man oh man; this is what frustrates me about discussing race. Talk about shifting ALL the blame on black people again. So not only is it our fault that we were dehumanized in America because rival tribes in West Africa worked together with Europeans—in return for weapons—to capture slaves, now it’s our fault for failing to push Clinton into doing anything about Rwanda?! Un-f*cking-believable! You act as if blacks in this country have for centuries been on the equal playing field as whites economically and politically, carrying lot of muscle to push the government to do what’s in our best interests. There’s only so much a few black political figures, celebrities and Civil Rights groups can do about policies in Africa when we can’t even get government help to fix our problems in the urban ghettos today. We still have gang wars in urban America today, so if the government isn’t helping us to solve these issues, how the hell you expect them to help us solve mass genocides and Aids in another continent? Even adding more jobs on the market and fixing the poor public school systems that lack the tools to train young kids to graduate and enter at the best colleges where they can compete with top students, could be a huge help, but we get neither. So please stop pretending that we have that much clout to push Clinton—or anyone else for that matter—to do anything about Rwanda, when we as blacks haven’t been LEGALLY considered true America citizens until Lyndon Johnson and others after him passed Civil Right laws into effect. Furthermore, I remember Michael Jackson, Quincy Jones, Oprah Winfrey, Lionel Ritchie, Diana Ross, Chris Tucker, Bob Johnson, and Berry Gordy for YEARS raising money in charity causes to help Africa. So how dare you smugly say even some of the privileged ones just sat on their asses and did nothing to help Africa with the aids crisis or mass genocide. Additionally, just because a lot of mainstream rappers do not talk about Africa (as if any mainstream singer today talks about topics with political substance) doesn’t mean that there’s no one who talks about Africa. I don’t expect a Southerner like Britney Spears to sing about European colonization and apartheid in Africa, so why do you expect shallow black POP artists to speak about Rwanda? Maybe if you listen to some underground rappers, you’d hear them speak about Africa. Then again, those type of artists do not sale nor land record deals. Mos Def, Common, Talib Kweli, Kanye West, Lauryn Hill and others have written songs about Africa, but sadly, since substance doesn’t sell nowadays, you probably won’t hear about it. [To be continued....]
[cont’d] You said I failed the mention the great things; were weren’t talking about the great things, we were talking about the effects Slavery, Jim Crow, segregation and terrorist attacks by the Klan has had on blacks in this country, and how so many try to downplay it as if we shouldn’t focus on it. Rivaling tribes who worked with Europeans, getting weapons in return, to catch slaves and bring them back here doesn’t have a damn thing to do with the mistreatment the slaves faced here in America. They were ripped from their native language, religion, cultural traditions and practices—everything!—and coerced and beaten by Europeans since the slave masters used the Bible and pseudo-science to justify that blacks were subhuman and inferior. The problem that you and so many others do is how you downplay history and how it has conditioned many of us. Downplaying the effects of Global European Imperialism and how it’s responsible for the racial paradigm today is what continues to create this wedge amongst blacks and whites. The racial paradigm today consists of two major components: Internalized Racism (Covert / Overt Racism towards one's own race), and Externalized Racism (Covert / Overt Racism towards another race). Internalized Racism is when some people become ashamed of their own race and at times, no longer want to identify with it. Internalized Racism USUALLY (not always) is most evident in Non-White people, from a statistical standpoint that is. Indeed, research confirms that people who have been the recipients of imperialism and oppression tend to subconsciously develop lower self-esteem about their own races while unknowingly perceiving the oppressors as superior. This mentality is categorized as an inferiority complex. As a result of the low-self esteem towards one's own race, many of those people tend to self-destruct unknowingly. Self-destruction comes in many different forms such as suicide, homicide, theft, drug addiction, cosmetic surgery (to look more white), changing accents (to sound more white), changing personalities (to act more white), associating less with one's race while associating exclusively to white people (to be more white), etc., etc. Just look at Michael Jackson as an example of Internalized Racism. You see, hatred towards one's own race is a direct manifestation of Imperialism (in this case, European Imperialism), because European Imperialism established a subconscious status quo of "Whiteness" as the dominant culture. Anything that would stray away from the dominant culture would be perceived as "Exotic", "Different", or "Ethnic". Minority groups are then constantly subjected to an identity crisis which in turn, manifests into internalized forms of racism and self-sabotage. Externalized Racism is when some people become condescending towards other races and at times, tend to unknowingly (or knowingly) indoctrinate other people into their own culture (Cultural Assimilation so to speak). Externalized Racism USUALLY (not always) is most evident in White people, from a statistical standpoint that is. There can be no doubt, for research has confirmed time and time again that the race who has been the oppressor of other races will tend to subconsciously develop higher self-esteem about their own race while unknowingly perceiving oppressed people as inferior. This mentality is categorized as a superiority complex. As a result of this subconscious superiority complex, those people tend to be apathetic of the sufferings of the oppressed. Their apathy causes them to either deny that Imperialism ever happened, easily forget that it happened, downplay Imperialism as a "moment in history" thus implying that it cannot produce emotional scars passed down from generations to the next, or worst of all, attack the image of the oppressed people by implying that it is in their nature to hang out in "Ghettos", "Gangs", commit crimes, do drugs, drop out in schools, and go to jail. This arrogance causes some in the White populace to convince themselves that Black people are "naturally violent" and "criminal", thus removing themselves of any guilt of having anything to do with it. But the fact of the matter is, all these negative statistics evident in Black communities are nothing more than manifestations of self-sabotage (Internalized Racism) caused by the oppressions committed by White people in the past. Until some white people understand this irrefutable fact, they will never be able to effectively participate in the battle against racism. In fact, they will only subconsciously reinforce racism, because the root of the problem is continuing to be kept under wraps.
[cont'd] As for as the genocide and Slavery against the Native Americans, I debated about this a couple of days ago with another guy who’ve I’ve come to respect so I’ll just post a few academic sources that has written about this: http://www.wicocomico-indian-nation.com/pages/genocide.html
http://www.unitednativeamerica.com/aiholocaust.html
http://www.iearn.org/hgp/aeti/aeti-1997/native-americans.html
http://academic.udayton.edu/race/06hrights/GeoRegions/NorthAmerica/UnitedStates02.htm (source: University of Dayton)
http://www.lcsc.edu/elmartin/historybehindthenews/Spring%202005/Delema.htm (source: Lewis Clark State College)
So help me out here....if white people are so evil why was it Britain and the U.S. that stamped out slavery across the globe? Slavery which by the way was prevelant in pretty much every nation (including between American Indian tribes). Not to mention the fact that the African slave trade was established by Arabs and the fact that african tribes (abyssinians and the massai) sold africans to the slave traders. Furthermore there is the issue of the majority of african slaves going to non-white countries such as the middle east and south america. I know these facts hurt your "it's all the white man's fault" world view but at some point one has to come to terms with the fact that every culture and color of people at one time or another have dark parts in their history. The difference is that some people can overcome their past and suceed in America where others use it as a cructh. For an example I'll give you michelle malkin herself who I'm pretty sure comes from asian parents....a group that has had a rocky road throughout American history to say the least.
Britain and the U.S. stamped out slavery across the globe? What shoddy literature have you been reading? Okay, since I really am tired of typing right now I’m going to post some links for you to read because basically everything I’ve said has went completely over your head and you probably think I’m being Afrocentric and hatin’ whitey. No one is using anything as a "crutch;" knowing the roots of racism, people will actually begin to see the sufferings of other cultures and they will also know why historically oppressed / enslaved cultures are at a severe psychological disadvantage today. And it is through that understanding of other culture’s sufferings caused by European Imperialism will people be able to gain the honesty and humanity to fight racism in today’s' world.
Genocide and Slavery Against the Black People: http://web.cocc.edu/cagatucci/classes/hum211/timelines/htimeline3.htm (source: Central Oregon Community College Archives) http://www.marion.ohio-state.edu/fac/vsteffel/web182/Imp-1.html (source: Ohio State University at Marion) http://www2.sunysuffolk.edu/westn/imperialism.html (source: Sunnfolk College Archives) http://mars.wnec.edu/~grempel/courses/world/lectures/imperialism.html (source: West New England College Online Library) http://lcweb2.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/r?frd/cstdy:@field(DOCID+za0022) (source: Library of Congress | Federal Research Division) European Imperialism and Conquest of India: http://www.mrdowling.com/612-british.html http://members.ozemail.com.au/~clday/background.htm http://www.lcsc.edu/modernchina/u3s3p4.htm (source: Lewis Clark State College) http://www.lcsc.edu/modernchina/u3s3p1.htm (source: Lewis Clark State College) http://www.lcsc.edu/modernchina/u3s3p3.htm (source: Lewis Clark State College) European Imperialism and Colonization of Asia: http://www.marion.ohio-state.edu/fac/vsteffel/web182/Imp-4.html (source: Ohio State University at Marion) http://www.wsu.edu/~dee/OTTOMAN/EUROPE.HTM (source: Washington State University) http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/eastasia/eastasiasbook.html#The%20Western%20Intrusion The extent of Global European Imperialism as it stands today: http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/pol116/colonies.htm (source: Mount Holyoke College Archives) http://www.fresno.k12.ca.us/divdept/sscience/history/imperialism_colonialism.htm http://mclane.fresno.k12.ca.us/wilson98/Assigments/ImpCH11.html The origins of Global European Imperialism: http://www.michaelparenti.org/Imperialism101.html (source: political scientist / history professor Dr. Michael Parenti) Imperialism, Sovereignty and the Making of International Law: http://www.cambridge.org/asia/catalogue/catalogue.asp?isbn=0521828929 Chronology of the history of Racism and Slavery in the United States: http://library.stanford.edu/africa/history/hislavery.html (source: Standford University) http://innercity.org/holt/slavechron.html http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/USAslavery.htm (the history of the Slave Trade) http://www.sonofthesouth.net/slavery/history-slavery.htm (the African Slave Trade | Historical Documents)Well, I would check out your links if I could click on them.....as it is the print is too small to even read. Anyhoo....Britain and later america crushed the slave trade through their navies by actually preventing slave ships to operate. And since european imperialism is to blame for so many problems is it the white man's fault that slavery still exists today in parts of Africa and the middle east? Did white people have something to do with african slave trade? Yes. But so did arabs (established it) and africans (sold other africans). The funny thing is that if you show me a white guy whose great-great-great-great grandad could've owned slaves I'll show you a black guy whose great-great-great-grandad could've sold slaves. I've accepted that caucasions in the past have mad abhorrent mistakes (as have every other group) but I choose to learn from it and strive to not let these things happen again. Hopefully at some point race baiters like sharpton, jackson and yourself will understand that your race has also done reprhensible things in the past instead of just writing it all off as the "white man's fault".
BTW the literature I pulled that from is written by Thomas Sowell, who, according to you must be a victim of internalized racism since he's a black man who doesn't accept your victim's mentality.
Genocide and Slavery Against the Black People: http://web.cocc.edu/cagatucci/classes/hum211/timelines/htimeline3.htm (source: Central Oregon Community College Archives) http://www.marion.ohio-state.edu/fac/vsteffel/web182/Imp-1.html (source: Ohio State University at Marion) http://www2.sunysuffolk.edu/westn/imperialism.html (source: Sunnfolk College Archives) http://mars.wnec.edu/~grempel/courses/world/lectures/imperialism.html (source: West New England College Online Library) http://lcweb2.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/r?frd/cstdy:@field(DOCID+za0022) (source: Library of Congress | Federal Research Division) European Imperialism and Conquest of India: http://www.mrdowling.com/612-british.html http://members.ozemail.com.au/~clday/background.htm http://www.lcsc.edu/modernchina/u3s3p4.htm (source: Lewis Clark State College) http://www.lcsc.edu/modernchina/u3s3p1.htm (source: Lewis Clark State College) http://www.lcsc.edu/modernchina/u3s3p3.htm (source: Lewis Clark State College) European Imperialism and Colonization of Asia: http://www.marion.ohio-state.edu/fac/vsteffel/web182/Imp-4.html (source: Ohio State University at Marion) http://www.wsu.edu/~dee/OTTOMAN/EUROPE.HTM (source: Washington State University) http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/eastasia/eastasiasbook.html#The%20Western%20Intrusion The extent of Global European Imperialism as it stands today: http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/pol116/colonies.htm (source: Mount Holyoke College Archives) http://www.fresno.k12.ca.us/divdept/sscience/history/imperialism_colonialism.htm http://mclane.fresno.k12.ca.us/wilson98/Assigments/ImpCH11.html The origins of Global European Imperialism: http://www.michaelparenti.org/Imperialism101.html (source: political scientist / history professor Dr. Michael Parenti) Imperialism, Sovereignty and the Making of International Law: http://www.cambridge.org/asia/catalogue/catalogue.asp?isbn=0521828929 Chronology of the history of Racism and Slavery in the United States: http://library.stanford.edu/africa/history/hislavery.html (source: Standford University) http://innercity.org/holt/slavechron.html http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/USAslavery.htm (the history of the Slave Trade) http://www.sonofthesouth.net/slavery/history-slavery.htm (the African Slave Trade | Historical Documents)
Sebastian, you're an idiot. This is my final post to you because I can tell what I’m dealing with when posting to you. First of all, I'm not even a fan of Sharpton’s and Jackson’s (I know you’re a conservative for you to use these two as if they mastermind this whole deal to get Imus fired), and I think they're by far two of the worst so-called Civil Rights leaders we have today. They have self-appointed themselves as leaders of black people, and I reject that wholeheartedly. My heroes happen to be many WHITE sociologists, psychologists and historians, not Sharpton and Jackson. Nice try. Race-baiter? Nah, son, I’m just someone who refuses to reject the notion that history doesn't have any effects on current racism of today. You see the people in this generation have been historically conditioned. White people, just like Black people, and Asian people, and Native Americans, Latinos, etc. are really just victims of history itself. Many of us are not even consciously aware that we are conditioned, and we are not even consciously aware that we could be racist for that matter. The generation today is not to feel guilty of the past, but to be AWARE of it. You see, we had nothing to do with the past, but we must make sure that we NOT to become ignorant of it. If we become ignorant and self-righteous, then we become defensive and illogical (just like yourself). Choosing to be ignorant of the past will only lead to the path of racism and cold-heartedness towards other races.
As for Sowell, he's a complete hack and only racists such as Steve Sailer and Jared Taylor are fans of the crap he writes. He'll never join the ranks of W.E.B. Dubois and Booker T. Washington. Plus, most of the crap he writes is backed by think tanks that financed "The Bell Curve." When you have a hardcore white supremacist like Steve Sailer praising Uncle—oops, I mean—Thomas Sowell, then you know he has little credibility.
Hillarious, you claim to not be a race-baiter but call thomas sowell an uncle tom...isn't that a racial slur that is hung on black people by other blacks who think they're assisting the white man? Congrats for not blindly following sharpton and jackson but many people do. My entire last post stated the fact that white people did have a large part of the african slave trade but that they are not the sole culprits. Other races were involved including blacks. Keep your head in the sand and keep repeating....it's all the white man's fault.........it's all the white man's fault.....it's all the white man's fault..........it's all the white man's fault.....
You don't appear to have read a word that preston wrote with your eyes open.
Actually I understand fully his reasoning that the psychological ramifications of slavery is holding the black man down. That said I guess I like to give black people more credit than he does 'cause I like to believe that maybe...just maybe they can the ability to overcome their past. If you keep telling someone they can't overcome something they never will. This is the soft rasicm of lower expectations.
I understand fully his reasoning
I have a hard time believing that. You didn't respond to a single substantive thing Preston wrote, you just recited the whole "If white men are so evil..." comment that I'm pretty sure I've read before under a different user name.
You seem to have made up your mind who Preston is and what he believes, which is a shame, because even if you disagree with him, there is a lot you can learn from him. But your loss...
how about i blame you and the white people involved for slavery? the blame goes all around here and for you to decry IMPERIALISM is fine and all but it happened and most of thr progress of the world in the west is because of it. so you take the good and the bad with anything. now the african slave trade, yes white europeans were keen to the idea that slaves is a good idea to have, and if the tribes themselves were going to sell out their own people for weapons, well i guess they clearly didnt care all that much about your people. I mean its just the way things worked back then, they needed weapons, so throw out a few poor blacks that live in huts. Its not about race, its about the powerful over the weak, with europeans at the time being the powerful ones. Now, way way back in the day it was the eygitipans enslaving the jews, then the romans enslaving the CHRISTIANS and jews and then the muslims enslaving anyone they can find who wasnt converting. THe mongolians enslaved their captives and anyone else they could find too. This has been happening for thousands of years and thankgod it doesnt happen in most of modern societies, esp this country. Now since slavery ended only 150 some years ago, well thats where the problem lies, we are still too close. You dont hear the christian people complaining about them damn romans, because it happened 2000 years ago. I think these things take a lot of time, and everyday, every year things get better. I think the frustration that comes from some whites is comming from the constant remarks and complaining/ pandering to the community that some people flaunt, even those who are white, this frustration is a reflection of the same frustration that blacks and other minorities have felt from being oppressed all those years sometimes to this day (although clearly the critism we been exposed to is no where near the oppression that others have gone through, my point is not the extreme of the oppression and angst, its the fact that its happening to some extent). now some people would say, poor whitey well look at us and what we went through. well ok sure, but honestly most people have too much day to day activities to worry about than about the long histroy of people they dont know being treated in ways that they find dispicable. But just because other races have been treated badly, doesnt mean people constantly race baiting us white people is right either. There is nothing wrong with knowing our own history, but it is what it is, history. We are not those people who did those things, and most people in this country are not bad people, and to try and tell us how bad the white corporate america is at times, well its hard for most people to understand or see. The fact that i do not know one person who is outright racist, and the people i know dont know anyone either is a testiment to the fact that we have come a long way, but we have a long way to go. I believe the issue that is in this country,a nd the world, is the powerful treating the weak poorly. This is a problem that many fight for everyday in this country, which is a sign that times are changing for the better. dont judge the past, they didnt knwo what we know today, and if history haas taught us anything, all people are scared of what they do not know, and they either conqour it, ignore it, or condem it (see gays and lesbians).
history does reflect on how we are as a society today, but there comes a point were we need to point out that history like you have, but not use it as a crutch. now im not saying black people do, i am just saying that some people who comment on race relations in this country use the same argument as a crutch on why things havnt changed. things havnt changed as much as some have liked, but they have for the better. these things take a lot of time, A LOT. but we have to be willing to tell the black community to work for something better, even if people are insulting and degrading to you. I mean in the end they are words, but as an indivdual YOU have the power to decide how they effect you, regardless of the intent of the indivdual, they are just words. I say keep fighting for what you think as an individual you deserve. At the same time we need to help other people be colorblind, these appeared double standards do not help because it just increases tension and anger between a group of people. If imus cant say it in jest, why can some black rapper say it in a rap? i mean, imus was clearly joking, but it was mean, people didnt like it. well the black rapper (or white or whoever sings and dances it doesnt matter) says it and its ok. I mean i personally dont think we should really stand up on a soap box of either issue and condemn them at all, im just saying it does look fishy to a lot of people thats all. i mean you dont like imus' joke so u call him a racist and pickett to have him fired? but you make a few comments at a funeral about how rap music is bad and thats the same thing? (im looking at you sharpton and anyone who says hes gone after other people he supposivly "condems"). it just doesnt look right ot a lot of people and im sorry but it doesnt look great to me.
The stupidity of Michelle "Squalkin" Malkin is well known. I can barely stand the sight of her and I love Asian chicks. (Hal Hiker)
Well, I guess that stops any racist accusations against you.What do you mean by "loving" Asian chicks?
IFor trhose who continue to use the argument that history alloes us as blasck people to use derogatory words to talk to each other.But tell others that this is not okayIMO Bs, The history behind those words is what should make them unacceptable from anybody. And talking about knowing better. these words were used to demean and demoralize our character. And that we can finf any justification in their use is beyond me. they mean the same no matter whose mouth they are coming from. Imus was wrong to say the words But not holding our selves accountable for using these words to the point that some believe they don't sting is just as wrong. As for the lacrosse players we have people saying they deserve what they got because they hired a stripper. First two of the three had nothing to to do with hiring the stripper they were just invited to the party. None of them even had sex with her as proven by dna results. I wonder how many of us black people who say it does not compare with what Imus said would that way if it were your sons. I happen to be black with three sons. And I do not care what color those boys are or how much money they have, being accused of rape and judged not by evidence but public opinion is wrong . And I don't care what color the accuser is every false accusation of rape makes it just that much harder for women who are actually raped to get justice.
I didn't think it was possible to make Ms. Malkin appear rational, but you guys managed it. Sometimes even a rightwing nut is right, and MS Malin made some important points in this discussion.
Scarred for life by Imus' stupid comments? Fasten your seat belts because life is going to be a bumpy ride if that can scar one for life.
As for white executives being blamed for the sexism, racism, and generally degrading lyrics of rap - does anyone remember Two Live Crew? Did they get their direction from the corporate office? They were singing Duke of Earl before some honky in a suit got hold of them?
The use of racist, dehumanizing language has been semi-legitimized by its prevalence in black 'art'. We need one standard of common decency that applies to everyone. I hear Al 'Tawana Brawley' complaining about rap lyrics and the n-word, but I don't see the kind of campaign that he was part of to get rid of Imus.
We need to avoid this kind of hypocrisy. If it takes a post-modernist with a PhD to explain why white people are responsible for rap lyrics, then you know it has to be wrong.
Not all that's right is wrong. You are as unbalanced as the jackasses for whom you serve as a watchdog.
I sent this letter to Ms. Malkin & her associates at fox noise:
On the April 12 edition of Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor, guest host > and Fox News analyst Michelle Malkin : > > > MALKIN: > "When was the last time Al Sharpton or Jesse Jackson looked at the top > of the Billboard hot rap tracks charts? Just look at it this week. > Every single one of the top six songs has the N-word, the H-word, the > B-word. When was the last time that Al Sharpton said anything about > it? Was it two or three or four years ago? Yes." > > > Ms. Malkin, I only have a have a simple BAS Degree, albeit with > 20/20 vision, but to my untrained eye > I can't find a single example of what you were talking about. > > Were you incorrect???, misinformed???, did you not do you homework???. > > > > Just so you have the facts: > [link to www.billboard.com] > > > 1. This Is Why I'm Hot > 2. I'm A Flirt > 3. Throw Some D's > 4. Outta' My System > 5. Go Getta' > 6. 2 Step > > If there is another "BILLBOARD" list that I am unaware of, could you > please provide me with a URL: > so I can locate it. I'm sure you wouldn't want some people to think > you are a liar, would you?? > > Sincerely, > Rev G. Bliefernich >
http://www.billboard.com/bbcom/charts/chart_display.jsp?g=Albums&f=Top+Rap+Albums
Ummm....does this work?
Um...No...No it doesn't. None of those "top six songs has the N-word, the H-word, the B-word." that I can see:
1. Paul Wall -- Get Money Stay True
2. Young Buck -- Buck The World
3. Mims -- Music is My Savior
4. Rich Boy -- Rich Boy
5. Redman -- Red Gone Wild
6. Lil' Flip -- I Need Mine $$
BTW, your link was to top rap albums...not singles.
This is the link to the rap singles and it does not support Malkin's argument either.
Malkin is apparently making stuff up again.
I guess you do talk shows for a living right? You understand that she had a slip of the tongue while arguing with an illogical idealogue like Malik Shabazz. Yes she didn't say Rap album chart but that was probably an honest mistake. In the heat of an argument one sometimes makes mistakes. But by all means, don't let the hypocrisy of the I can say this but you can't enter your mind hear. The fact of the matter gangsta rappers and their ilk have done far more damage to the african american culture than don imus.
Actually I think I made a mistake. Above Ironmaiden shows some of the lyrics to these songs. Apparently some (but not all) of them do contain the words she mentioned. The problem is that as you point out, doing this kind of show is difficult and it is entirely understandable that the hosts will make mistakes. To me, it just underscores the worthless nature of these shows to begin with. The information is often slipshod, the assertions imprecise or just plain wrong -- often in a way that is self-serving to the host.
I would seriously have to question the intelligence of anyone who watches Malkin or O'Reilly in the serious hope of learning something worthwhile.
Sorry about the mangled prvious post: this should be easier to read
On the April 12 edition of Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor, guest host and Fox News analyst Michelle Malkin :
MALKIN: When was the last time Al Sharpton or Jesse Jackson looked at the top of the Billboard hot rap tracks charts? Just look at it this week. Every single one of the top six songs has the N-word, the H-word, the B-word. When was the last time that Al Sharpton said anything about it? Was it two or three or four years ago? Yes.
Ms. Malkin, I only have a have a simple BAS Degree, albeit with 20/20 vision, but to my untrained eye I can't find a single example of what you were talking about.
Were you incorrect??, misinformed???, did you not do you homework???.
Just so you have the facts: [link to www.billboard.com]
1. This Is Why I'm Hot 2. I'm A Flirt 3. Throw Some D's 4. Outta' My System 5. Go Getta' 6. 2 Step
If there is another "BILLBOARD" list that I am unaware of, could you please provide me with a URL: so I can locate it. I'm sure you wouldn't want some people to think you are a liar, would you??
Sincerely, Rev G. Bliefernich
http://www.billboard.com/bbcom/charts/chart_display.jsp?g=Albums&f=Top+Rap+Albums
Ummm....does this work?
Deja vu? No...It doesn't work. Malkin was apparently making things up as I mentioned above.
For anyone to totally dismiss the wholesale slaughter of the native americans and the near total usurpation of their land as not racially based either needs to re-read American history or go back to school and learn some facts. Being part native american I know what the white settlers did to the natives when they arrived and it was not called for. The natives helped the settlers survive the first winter. If they hadn't most likely the settlers would not have survived. What did the settlers do to repay that help? They proceeded to mount war on them and drive them from land that was theirs by right of having lived on it for decades before the settlers even showed up.
The native americans were never on a level playing field with the settlers. White americans wanted the land the natives lived on and proceeded to take the land by any means available to them. They routinely violated "treaties", they gave them small pox infested blankets to make sure they died and many more atrocities were committed against them. To say this was not based on race is at best dishonest. The Souix word "wasicha" is translated to "he who has everything" and they used that word to describe the whites.
Native americans and blacks were enslaved by the settlers. Many blacks who escaped slavery went to the natives for protection from the slave catchers. Any settler who decided he wanted to live with the natives was killed if caught and they actively sought out those who had "broken " with what was deemed the norm at the time.
I suggest if you want to learn the truth about how racism has been so pervasive in america and how our kids american history textbooks have been whitewashed about racism in america read "Lies my teacher told me".
So...was there no war or slavery before the whites showed up? I guess in your mind the hundreds of different tribes just smoked the peace pipe all day and never had wars of their own. Yes slaughter of the natives was abominable but indians weren't 100% civil before whites got here. In the long run I'd say the resulting civilization and the improvements to human society that have been a direct result of the country which never would've happened had the settlers not taken over I'd say it's an overall plus yield. BTW part cherokee myself.....so if you want to call me a bigot I guess the "uncle tom" slur would work here not just plain racist
>>Yes slaughter of the natives was abominable but indians weren't 100% civil before whites got here. In the long run I'd say the resulting civilization and the improvements to human society that have been a direct result of the country which never would've happened had the settlers not taken over I'd say it's an overall plus yield.
Archie Bunker lives.That is so incredicbly stuipid it is hard to respond to it. We destroyed Indian Culture through either genocide or ethnic cleansing, whatever you want to call it. And the result was good? I guess you belong to the KKK with statements like that.
Yes....and I guess we brought war to this continant. The truth of the matter is that the indians were not exactly getting along with each other before we got here. They were constantly at war with each other the major difference between us and the indians is that we were more organized (not split into tribes) and more advanced. What would you rather have happened? The indians satayed in charge of the new world and basically just continued their non-progressive culture? I've come to terms with the fact that we made mistakes but the greater good that has arisen out of the past more than makes up for it. Do you actually think that because the past is dark this country is not great? Every single culture or group of people have made mistakes including native americans, blacks, whites, hispanics, etc. To put the blame of the past on any one group is ridiculous. I'm sorry that history doesn't support your bleeding heart "the indians were all peaceful" routine but....well, it doesn't.
Greater good? Like polluted streams, dirty air, extinct species, deforestation, urban sprawl and WMD?
Say what you want about their warrior mentality but their kinship to the land was an example to emulate.
Anyway, what do you propose? No human is above reproach but just because other non-white cultures have their flaws, are white folks simply supposed wait for everybody else to get 'civilized' before examining their own misdeeds?
Sure sounds like an argument that posits one should blame everybody else and hold them accountable to higher standards than the people with the vast majority of power.
I'm certain that I must be misunderstanding your reasoning. Please clarify and help me understand.
I'm sorry. Did I say Rwanda was the fault of black Americans? What I said was that Africans are not completely innocent when it comes to the EVIL that was slavery and that the forces behind that aspect of slavery are still in force today.
And NO it wasn't the fault of blacks that Rwanda wasn't stopped. Clinton was more distracted by the Whitewater witch hunt than anything else BUT could black leaders have done more? I think they would agree that they could have.
I agree that some black entertainers have been very instrumental in helping Africa but it is whites (and Europeans, not Americans) who are at the forefront of raising consciousness of conditions there. And how about a "No Bling" campaign to underscore the conditions in diamond producing countries and where the money goes? When a rapper is covered in diamonds isn't most of the money spent on those going to "the Man"?
My basic point is that injustice is not a race, creed or color issue. It's universal. Some of the greatest atrocities in history were perpetrated upon people by people of their own color. White people have slaughtered other white people, blacks other blacks, Indians other Indians and Asians other Asians. Injustice still exists but people of all colors are working to overcome it and they deserve some credit. There's enough blame to go around but let's give some people the credit they deserve for a change.
Stop it! Using rationality to defuse someone's victims mentality is not nice! Stop bringing up refuting points and just accept that the white man has been the sole race that has ruined the world!
Malkin and the talking heads that spew their holier than thou tripe are attempting to change the subject and using their piety to distort the truth. Every last drop of it.
Sebastion I never said that the white man is responsible for ruining the world. I noted how abysmally the white race has treated blacks and nativce americans. You put me in mind of the wingnuts who claim Bill Clinton is responsible for all the world's ills since the dawn of time.
Yes I know tribes warred amongst themselves that is the natural state of humans, we fight what we don't understand. To imply that I posited that the native americans just sat around "smoking the peace pipe" all the time is just another stereotype of native americans and to be abhorred for it's blatant racism.
This is not as you put it "rationalism" it's fact and I suggest you get up off your butt and do some real reading about native americans and their lack of civilization (your words not mine). Who decides who or what culture isn't civilized? From my readings in the past I would say the native americans were much more civilized than the settlers since the settlers robbed graves and stole the foodstores of the native americans. Yeah in my book that's real civilized.
I'm going to cite one example of the stereotype that native americans were savages in the Disney movie Pocahontas. Yes I know it's not factually accurate but it does show how the settlers thought of native americans at the time, and how the native americans might have seen the settlers as savages also. One thing the movie does well is portray the racism of the times from both sides.
If one day by sheer dint of luck we get rid of all racism and stereotypes I for one will be a happier person. We all stereotype people so none of us are guiltless in this but I guess some of us are better able to hide it than others. I have been stereotyped in the past due to my AOL screen name. I love to watch NASCAR with my son and I have been stereotyped as a redneck hick but I am far from that having been raised as an FDR democrat. That just goes to prove the old saying " when you assume something you make an ASS out of U and ME".
And as for the citation of the Disney movie I have a child so gimme a break and don't bust me on that.
At what time period would this be in if the Indian culture which was far inferior technically. While the indians may have had greater morals, organizationally and technically they were nowhere close. Sorry about implying that you had the sterotypical view of "it's whitey's fault" which is the typical response that comes from the left. I think the way I look at it, in a way we're both right. While the deplorable dealing the early U.S. had with the natives should have never happened. I think that the ambition of the early settlers got in the way of their civility. That said had America not become what it is today human society would not be as advanced as it currently is. I think what I'm trying to say is that one of the reasons that the early settlers were facilitated in believing that the indians were savages in how they contiually warred against each other and used this to rationalize the U.S. war on the natives. Looking back at the advents of that entire sordid history I think it is actually a shame that both cultures couldn't co-exist. While a big part of that had to do with the white ambition of "manifest destiny" the simple fact that tribes didn't seem to worry about killing each other enabled the settlers to justify warring with the indians in their minds. I guess the sad thing is that while we could've leared a lot from the indians, they could've also learned a lot from us. I understand that there were deplorable mistakes made but again, the overall plus yield to the entire human race through the advancements in mankind that resulted from our capitalistic society makes it a plus yield.
You know, Malkin said something earlier about how she's sick of the media "milking this story." Well, she is only milking this story further by talking about it. What an idiot. She's talking about the media like she's not a part of it.
I have kids, too, but I don't remember much about Disney's Pocahontas. I like Asian women--except MM--so Mulan is my favorite.
Now back to the Indians. One thing about the Indians is that they were never a single group of Indians or Native Americans as some call them (I was born in America so I'm a native American although of European descent.) The Indians were and are many different tribes with different languages, customs and traditions. And they often hated each other. They were probably happy to see US forces wipe out another neighboring tribe. They would have never considered joining forces to fight a larger enemy. Tribalism did not serve the Indians well in their fight against the US.
Now about the Indians being savages, it is interesting to note that they are depicted as such in non other than the Declaration of Independence and I quote: (Speaking of King George) "He had excited insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare is the undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions." Those are strong words. MERCILESS INDIAN SAVAGES WHOSE KNOW RULE OF WARFARE IS THE UNDISTINGUISHED DESTRUCTION OF ALL AGES, SEXES AND CONDITIONS. That doesn't sound like "victim" to me.
And Thomas Jefferson had a certain respect for the Indians as he stated in Notes on the state of Virginia He thought that Indians were brave, honorable and loving to their children although they treated their women poorly because it was civilization that gave women "enjoyment of their natural equality".
Of course, he also thought slaves should be given their own colonies and allowed to govern themselves as free and independent people because the prejudices of whites and the recollection of injuries perpetrated against blacks would "divide us into parties and produce convulsions which will probably never end but in the extermination of one race or another".
I guess in a certain sense he was--is--right. Prejudice and recollection of injuries has divided us, hasn't it?
I have kids, too, but I don't remember much about Disney's Pocahontas. I like Asian women--except MM--so Mulan is my favorite.(Hal Hiker)
OK, we get it. This isn't a mail order bride site.
Brilliant response...i guess ifyou can't beat 'em insult 'em.
Hey HB lefty: I was joking about Asian women, OK. My Italian wife wouldn't like me trolling mail order bride sites.
And a lefty in HB? I thought OC was righty and whitey. Oh, and Asian. ;-)
And I know. I grew up there.
is Michelle Malkin...the Asian version of Anne Coulter???!!! Neither of them can hold a candle to any member of the Rutgers Ladies Basketball team or their coach!!! Michelle, Anne...go back to doing what you do best...becoming the best Stepford wives you can be!!!! (Oops...sorry Anne, you'll just have to be contented wth being a Stepford wife-in-waiting)!!!
Malkin uses a well worn right wing propaganda strategy. She assumes that use the N word, H word in fictional hip hop music is the same as a radio personality using it to denigrate real live women whom he had not met at the time he insulted them (and who had just played a great basketball season). Hip hop artists write fictional songs using whatever terms they want to accomplish their art. If you find it offensive, don't patronize their art. Imus isn't using language to advance an idea. He was trying to curry favor with his mostly white, male conservative audience. Throwing out a few insults at young black women in New Jersey is a quick easy way to do that. It's also mean-spirted and unneccesary.
So should Imus have been fired. Though I have nothing but contempt for him, I'd have to say no. Why? Free speech is a precious thing. It should be protected. I'd be willing to put up with mean spirited insults from Imus to make sure that the guy with actually something to say isn't hindered from saying it.
[link to www.kansascity.com]
sums up this whole thing beautifully, read it
Michelle Malkin, I applaud your comments! It's about time someone stands up to this ridiculous issue and not back down, hide and start firing everybody who says something perceived as controversial. I'm inclined to believe Imus didn't even understand what he said...."nappy-headed hos" certainly does not describe a group of athletes at the top of their game. With that, I have to wonder who is more ignorant, Imus for making the comment that didn't even make sense, or the Rutgers basketball team for taking the comment so seriously....Wake up Rutgers! Unless you feel like you are "nappy-headed hos" the comment shouldn't have bothered or offended you. Don't lower yourself to Imus' standards, rise above it by just dismissing his ramblings!
You are just excusing the actions of a bully.
In my opinion, all these "double-standard" ills and politcal biases, past and present, all stem from the financial gain of some entity.. Until we place more importance on people over the gain of money (yeh, right), we'll be debating to our deaths... now where's my check?
Oh, geez. Here we go with the 'blame whitey' again....
Ms. Maukin's holier than thou attitude is so typical of the prevailing attitude, that it's the rapper's that should be blamed...BUT, in reality IT IS the fault of the record producers & execs who allow this trash to be put on the airwaves...do you(she) actually think these record people have some sort of moral conscience when given the option of (a) make money off of lyrics & references that they know are negative, OR, (b) make a conscience effort on their part to just say no to the venom certain rap artist are allowed to spit out....you & I both know they will most certainly choose "a" as long as there is no feedback & mega profits.....
I've said this before on this site....if it does not start w/black folks & the community to monitor/start the dialog, then sick idiots like Maudlin, Beck, O'Really and Rush will continue to find a soapbox to bash any alternate attitude/feelings.
Her first guest...while he's talking about the Zulu Nation and all that jazz he mentions "good" rap acts that don't get any coverage or big record sales. He actually mentions Dead Prez. Now, as a hispanic I can listen to these guys and not feel sick, but these guys constantly insist that "the white man is the enemy" and that we need to run up into the precinct and kill us some cops. To recommend that we listen to the white hating, willing to kill cops rap is sort've insulting.
NGDOMS3075,
Thanks for the link, but there are a few things that have to be said about Jason Whitlock and wayard his article. This is a rebuttal I wrote:
I will start my commentary the same way Whitlock started his: Thank you, Jason Whitlock. Thank you for placing the blame of an old White man’s racist rants on rap music. Why do some Black people like Whitlock always feel that it is always necessary to vilify hip-hop culture in these situations? I am pretty sure no White columnist has ever expressed disdain for White people and demanded they get their act together because they perpetuate stereotypes in country culture in songs like “Redneck Woman”. It wasn’t rappers who went on MSNBC, a news outlet no less, and made racist, sexist comments. Imus did and he should be held accountable. Which is ironic considering accountability is one of the only things preached to the Black community by Whitlock and his ilk of finger pointers. Yet, there is a massive backlash of voices quick to pass the buck to a sub-culture they only know through main stream media outlets. What I find the most concerning about his article is the way he paints hip-hop with a broad negative stroke. Rap music is a part of hip-hop. Like ALL genres of popular music, rap has many different sides and feels: from hardcore, graphic violence glorifications of groups like N.W.A to thought provoking self-reflections of rappers like Common to beautiful love ballads of groups like A Tribe Called Quest. It’s offensive to see Whitlock making negative assumptions about the entire Black community based on the one side of the hip-hop movement that is exploited by the media. As smart as Whitlock claims to be, he still has fallen into a trap of misinformation and prejudice. Very much like conservative barkers Bill O’Reilly and Rush Limbaugh. I am 29 years old I grew up living hip-hop my entire life. So did a lot of my friends and most of us were fortunate enough to go to college and have decent jobs. What would Whitlock say about that? Are we anomalies? The majority of Blacks in this country are now middleclass. I am not saying the Black community does not face problems but, these problems are not just OUR problems. They are ALL of our problems: White, Black, Asian, Latino, etc… The White community faces drug problems just as much as, if not, more so than the Black community. The same could be said about divorce, poverty, crime, violence, sexism and a whole host of other things. Why is it always Black people who have to air the dirty laundry publicly? When there is media coverage of a crime that takes place in a White community, how come the media doesn’t call on their “leaders” to discuss their problems? The sad thing is Whitlock is being played and doesn’t even realize it. This article is exactly what Neo-ConAmerica wants to see. The more finger pointing a Black man can do, the less they have to. Again, thank you, Jason Whitlock. Thank you for playing the game precisely the way they wanted. Thanks for the rant.Jhill3rd, haven't you noticed? Whitlock has become a media darling and overnight star due to this simplistic, misguided article. He's been praised by folks as politically diverse as Rosie O'Donnell and Tucker Carlson as someone who "tells it like it is" to us black folk. Like Bill Cosby, he's now been adopted as a black man who isn't afraid to chastise his people and take us to task when we refuse to accept personal responsibility for our actions. His article was poor scholarship (if you can even call it that; it was more like a rant I'd hear when getting my hair cut at the barbershop), and it proves more than anything he should stick to writing about sports rather than race, politics and sub-cultures. Whitlock does not have a background in sociology and anthropology. In the same spirit as John Ridley and his disgusting, elitist article he written in Esquire last year (where Ridley does his best Chris Rock imitation by making distinctions between "niggas and black people"), Whitlock has been placed on a pedestal by white folks everywhere his article is harsher on urban black behavior, never mentioning a single thing about institutionalized racism and antipathy (a reality that many white AND black sociologists and historians have documented for decades now). Again, like John Ridley, Whitlock has been craving for mainstream acceptability and reverence for years, and discovered the key to mainstream success and lionization as a black political commentator is to take a moral ground and patronize his own people. James Baldwin he is not. Someone like Baldwin focused on BOTH the psychological chains of slavery and institutionalized racism; when he spoke of black empowerment and self-reliance, there was no condescending attitude in his message, which is why he's considered one of America's greatest essayists on the same par as Norman Mailer and Gore Vidal. Baldwin gave us penetrating analysis, not a disingenuous rant.
But like the late sociologist Raymond Franklin said in his now classic “Black Bourgeois,” the black middle class is riddled with hypocrites, ignoramuses and moral idiots. Franklin wrote that the central animus of the Black Bourgeois is to compensate for their feelings of inadequacy by trying to make themselves more acceptable to whites. He points out that the central thrust then becomes closing a blind eye to the racism of white society and pretending that economic inequalities aren’t race structured. Furthermore, in spite of all the brouhaha over Black lack of accomplishment, blacks have been making great strides in different fields since the sixties. So what is the problem? The problem is that black people have chosen to maintain a distinct identity and a core part of that identity is the scars and wounds that have been wrought by white supremacy and its associated doctrines. So I find it laughable that Whitlock is some kind of bold new hero calling for personal responsibility. Since the earliest times of Black Foundings in America, black leaders have called for responsibility. Booker T called for it; DuBois called for it; MLK called for it; Malcolm X called for it. Thus, what has been found to be so praiseworthy about Whitlock is not this mythical nouveau call for black personal responsibility; no, what many whites have found admirable about Whitlock is the way he completely absolves Europeans of any damage, or insult or of grief to blacks over the past 400 years, and the way he infers the notion that such damage, insult or grief is of any relevance to black conditions today. Other black leaders have called for black responsibility WHILE refusing to disacknowledge the historic role of racism. Whitlock doesn’t do the latter and he even fails in his attempt to do the former. He has discovered that the key ingredient that White America want is not personal responsibility, what they want is silence—amnesia. You know, the "Nothing Happened" approach to history that reaffirms to vigorous denials of guilt by contemporary white folk, or their search for imaginary scapegoats.
I find it amusing that most of you are guilty right now of everything you say you are against. Such hate speech in here! You fall for the rantings of lib bloggers whose only job is to plant their flat ass in the blogosphere and keep the fire of lies and misinformation burning. Remember the email that with the pic of the big fat guy sitting naked at his computer? Liberal blogger! Somebody tell me how this whole thing turned into an attack on Conservatives? You are all falling for a Clinton brainwashing technique that has been around since the two used the sacred vows of marriage to further their political agendas. I am not going to suggest you guys smarten up anymore, I am tired of telling you to use some sense when the fact is that you are completely void of any.
What "hate speech" do you speak of? Examples please.