DebateGate
General Category => 3DHS => Topic started by: The_Professor on April 09, 2007, 11:13:27 PM
-
Justifiable or over=reaction?
MSNBC, CBS Radio suspend Imus show
But charity event will air as scheduled Thursday and Friday
The Associated Press
Updated: 9:43 p.m. ET April 9, 2007
NEW YORK - After a career of cranky insults, radio star Don Imus was fighting for his job Monday following one joke that by his own admission went “way too far.â€
CBS Radio and MSNBC both said they were suspending Imus’ morning talk show for two weeks following his reference last week to members of the Rutgers women’s basketball team as “nappy-headed hos.â€
(MSNBC.com is a joint venture of Microsoft and NBC Universal.)
The suspension begins next Monday.
While CBS made its announcement without comment, MSNBC said Imus’ regret at making the inappropriate comment and his stated dedication to changing the show’s discourse made it believe this was the appropriate response.
“Our future relationship with Imus is contingent on his ability to live up to his word,†the network said. MSNBC simulcasts his radio program weekday mornings.
Imus continued to apologize Monday, both on his show and on a syndicated radio program hosted by the Rev. Al Sharpton, who is among several black leaders demanding his ouster.
Both MSNBC and CBS Radio said they would go ahead and air the previously scheduled Imus radiothon in support of the Tomorrow's Children's Fund, the CJ Foundation for Sudden Infant Death Syndrome research and the Imus Ranch planned for Thursday and Friday.
Apologies continue
Imus could be in real danger if the outcry causes advertisers to shy away from him, said Tom Taylor, editor of the trade publication Inside Radio.
“Everyone is on tenterhooks waiting to see whether it grows and whether the protest gets picked up more broadly,†Taylor said.
Imus isn’t the most popular radio talk show host — the trade publication Talkers ranks him the 14th most influential — but his audience is heavy on the political and media elite that advertisers pay a premium to reach. Authors, journalists and politicians are frequent guests — and targets for insults.
He has urged critics to recognize that his show is a comedy that spreads insults broadly. Imus or his cast have called Colin Powell a “sniffling weasel,†New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson a “fat sissy†and referred to Sen. Ben Nighthorse Campbell of Colorado, an American Indian, as “the guy from ‘F Troop.â€â€™ He and his colleagues also called the New York Knicks a group of “chest-thumping pimps.â€
Yet, over the years, Imus' success was often a result of his caustic on-air barbs.
"That Imus is in trouble for being politically incorrect is certainly not new," said Tom Taylor, editor of the trade publication Inside Radio. "He's lived his life in and out of trouble ... This is something CBS will be watching very carefully."
Recent controversies involving Imus focused on a member of his morning team, Sid Rosenberg, who was fired two years ago after a particularly vile crack about cancer-stricken singer Kylie Minogue. Prior to that, a racially tinged comment by Rosenberg about Venus and Serena Williams stirred another controversy.
But the NABJ cited two other incidents involving Imus himself: the host's insults toward a pair of black journalists. Imus has called PBS' Gwen Ifill a "cleaning lady" and described William Rhoden of The New York Times as "a quota hire," the group said.
On Sharpton’s program Monday, Imus said that “our agenda is to be funny and sometimes we go too far. And this time we went way too far.â€
The Rutgers comment has struck a chord, in part, because it was aimed at a group of young women at the pinnacle of athletic success. It also came in a different public atmosphere following the Michael Richards and Mel Gibson incidents, said Eric Deggans, columnist for the St. Petersburg Times and chairman of the media monitoring committee of the National Association of Black Journalists, which also wants Imus canned.
“This may be the first time where he’s done something like this in the YouTube era,†Deggans said. Viewers can quickly see clips of Imus’ remarks, not allowing him to redefine their context, he said.
On his show Monday, Imus called himself “a good person†who made a bad mistake.
“Here’s what I’ve learned: that you can’t make fun of everybody, because some people don’t deserve it,†he said. “And because the climate on this program has been what it’s been for 30 years doesn’t mean that it has to be that way for the next five years or whatever because that has to change, and I understand that.â€
Future of show unknown
Imus’ radio show originates from WFAN in New York City and is syndicated nationally by Westwood One, both of which are managed by CBS. CBS Radio just replaced chief executive Joel Hollander with Dan Mason. With Imus’ radio show reaching an estimated 2.5 million people a week, his future could conceivably be decided by CBS chief Leslie Moonves.
The show is simulcast daily on MSNBC, where it reached an estimated 361,000 viewers in the first three months of the year, up 39 percent from last year. That’s the best competitive position it has ever achieved against CNN (372,000 viewers).
“He will survive it if he stops apologizing so much,†said Michael Harrison, publisher of Talkers. Imus clearly seems under corporate pressure to make amends, but he’s nearly reached the point where he is alienating the fans who appreciate his grumpy outrageousness.
Even if he were to be fired, he’s likely to land elsewhere in radio, Harrison said.
The Rev. Jesse Jackson and about 50 people marched Monday outside Chicago’s NBC tower to protest Imus’ comments. He said MSNBC should abandon Imus and MSNBC should hire more black pundits.
Julian Bond, chairman of the NAACP board of directors, said it is “past time his employers took him off the air.â€
“As long as an audience is attracted to his bigotry and politicians and pundits tolerate his racism and chauvinism to promote themselves, Don Imus will continue to be a serial apologist for prejudice,†Bond said.
Imus was mostly contrite in his appearance with Sharpton, although the activist did not change his opinion that Imus should lose his job. At one point Imus seemed incredulous at Sharpton’s suggestion that he might walk away from the incident unscathed.
“Unscathed?†Imus said. “How do you think I’m unscathed by this? Don’t you think I’m humiliated?â€
URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17999196/
-
There are some young women from my sons' high school going to college on basketball scholarships. They're black, they're sweet girls, straight-A students and I've known them since they were in kindergarten, some of them. It just made me sick to hear Imus say that. Those girls are someone's daughters.
It is simply not ok to say what he did. I bet he'll be fine, though. He's rich, he's not hurting, no matter if he is let go.
-
Guess they didn't get his "nuance".
-
Or perhaps we just need to impliment the fairness doctrine, in order for another "group" to be equally insulted
-
Too bad he didn't call black U.S. servicewomen fighting in Iraq a bunch of nappy-haired hos, then his ass would be grass and none of his right-wing dingbat defenders would have a word to say against it.
Of course he should have the freedom to insult anyone he likes. Whether he gets the corporate support necessary to ensure that his verbal diarrhoea reaches the ears of millions is the interesting question, because it shows where the power really lies in America, and how much of a concern racism really is to the power-holders.
I still have to wonder, though, if this isn't a good time for a singing group or even a commercial basketball team to style themselves "The Nappy-Headed Hos?" Where there's a buck to be made . . . I just hope that prick Imus doesn't come in for any of the royalties.
-
Too bad he didn't call black U.S. servicewomen fighting in Iraq a bunch of nappy-haired hos, then his ass would be grass and none of his right-wing dingbat defenders would have a word to say against it.
Speaking of more BS accusations, who the hell's defending him??
-
Justifiable.
He and others like him make their fortune by being racist and biggoted nimrods, so he gets a small dose of his own medicine.
It is unfortunate that decent people aren't listened to a quarter as much as "shock" radio hosts.
-
wow
howard stern been saying worst stuff on regular radio for decades.
only once did he apoligies and that was a really really bad comment on a dead singer-selena
the few times I hear him he just sounds boring.
ther voice is not exactly a radio voice.
howard has a good voice
rush has a good voice
dr. laura is nails on the chaulkboard.
-
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17999196/page/2/ --> developments
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3226997/ - -->Attempts at salvage
http://blog.thedemocraticdaily.com/?p=3763 ---> Kerry Interview
http://kerryblog.blogspot.com/2006_07_01_archive.html ---> Kerry Interview
http://pandagon.net/2007/04/06/don-imus-rutgers-womens-basketball-team-nappy-headed-hos/ ---> Hair and Boortz connection
http://archives.cjr.org/year/00/2/nobile.asp --->History
http://www.langston.com/Fun_People/1996/1996APF.html ----> history , plays for the president
My goal is to goad people into saying something that ruins their life.
Don Imus
Watchin' Dan Rather do the news, he looks like he's making a hostage tape. They should have guys in ski masks and AK-47s just standing off to the side.
Don Imus
You can't get much more liberal than John Kerry is. I mean, he's my candidate, but, I mean, come on.
Don Imus
http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/d/don_imus.html
-
Howard Stern to Imus: 'Say F**k You!'
Shock jock Howard Stern is no fan of embattled Don Imus, but he said he knows what his fellow talk show host should have told critics: "F**k you.â€
"He's apologizing like a guy who got his first broadcasting job,†Stern told his Sirius Satellite Radio audience after Imus apologized for his derogatory comment about the Rutgers women’s basketball team.
"He should have said, "F**k you, it’s a joke.â€
Former radio host Bob Grant – no stranger to controversy – also weighed in on the Imus flap, according to the New York Daily News.
Grant was fired from New York radio powerhouse WABC over a remark he made about Commerce Secretary Ron Brown, who was aboard a plane that crashed in Croatia in 1996. Grant told a caller: "My hunch is [Brown] is the one survivor. Maybe it’s because at heart I’m a pessimist.†After Brown was found dead, Grant’s WABC contract was terminated.
"Everything doesn’t come out the way you want,†he said regarding Imus’ comment.
"There were many times when I’d be going home and say to myself, ‘What the hell did I say that for?’ But that’s the pace you work at. That’s what people don’t take into account.â€
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2007/4/10/112340.shtml?s=rss
-
All these people are VERY INAPPROPRIATE and I do not listen to them becuase of that fact. But, due to this FACT, why should anyone be surprised and why should he apologize? This is his forte, his calling sign.
-
<<Speaking of more BS accusations, who the hell's defending him??>>
Beats me. Did this guy call down unanimous condemnation on his head? NOBODY wants to stick up for him? Coulter? Rush? Michelle Malkin? Lieberman? (just kidding, Joe)
-
<<Speaking of more BS accusations, who the hell's defending him??>>
Beats me. Did this guy call down unanimous condemnation on his head?
Lack of universal condemnation that you haven't heard of is "defense"? Try again
NOBODY wants to stick up for him? Coulter? Rush? Michelle Malkin? Lieberman? (just kidding, Joe)
Stick up for what? His right to be an idiot? He has an absolute right to be a moron, and to say blatantly stupid, and borderline racist comments. And the radio network has every right to pull him off the air, if they believe he went too far. Funny thing though, I hear pathetically worse garbage from LW pundits & talk show hosts all the time. Funny how they're not being made to take the perp walk that Imus is being made to make
-
<<Funny thing though, I hear pathetically worse garbage from LW pundits & talk show hosts all the time. Funny how they're not being made to take the perp walk that Imus is being made to make>>
LMFAO. Looks like I don't have to look very far for Imus' defenders after all.
-
<<Funny thing though, I hear pathetically worse garbage from LW pundits & talk show hosts all the time. Funny how they're not being made to take the perp walk that Imus is being made to make>>
LMFAO. Looks like I don't have to look very far for Imus' defenders after all.
Ohh. Who so then? Oh wait, you think my highlighting a blatant hypocritical double standard is analogus to defending Imus? Oh yea, I forgot, it's Tee-leaf logic. ::)
-
<<Oh wait, you think my highlighting a blatant hypocritical double standard is analogus to defending Imus? >>
Yeah, precisely, because that's the only defence the guy's got. He is NOT going to defend himself by claiming he didn't say what he said, because it's public record. He is NOT going to defend himself by claiming that the team members really are "nappy-headed hos" because they obviously are not. The only defence the poor bugger has is the so-called double standard. Even though no liberal commentator in the real world actually come anywhere close to what Imus said. (hint - - this does NOT include sirs' prolific imaginary planets in which liberal commentators run wild, personally insulting innocent college students with racist and sexist garbage every hour on the hour)
We should be used by now to sirs' classic right-wing defence of "Our critics do it too" or in it's more usual form, "Clinton did it! Clinton did it first!) In their minds, that IS a valid defence.
I was just watching Anderson Cooper speaking to a panel of three blacks, and one of them made a very interesting point about all these right-wing Republican "values" groups, like Focus on the Family and apparently NOT ONE of them has condemned Imus so far - - as if racism, sexism, and cruelty are all perfectly consistent with the "family values" these giant, two-legged lice claim to espouse.
-
Even though no liberal commentator in the real world actually come anywhere close to what Imus said.
Errrr, I was under the impression that Imus was a liberal. He supported Gore and Kerry, after all, and he runs several "green" projects.
-
My 16-year-old son and I were listening to the athletes speak at their news conference.
He didn't get why Imus said what he said. What made him say it?
I told him that as far as I could figure out, if women aren't in their proper role as smiling, lipsticked nicely dressed submissive helpmeets, they're fair game. These girls were playing a very good game of basketball, were athletic in build, not submissive, competetive, not at all like the picture-perfect Donna Reed type that would be beyond reproach.
So they get called those names on national TV. It's abuse, verbal abuse, as far as I can tell elicited by their lack of conformity to what's considered the norm for female looks and behavior.
-
<<Errrr, I was under the impression that Imus was a liberal. He supported Gore and Kerry, after all, and he runs several "green" projects.>>
You got me there, I guess. I was responding to sirs' point that "left-wingers" allegedly got away with worse stuff than Imus every day. Sloppy me, I took "left-wingers" as "liberals" and figured that sirs was comparing "liberals" with Imus, assuming then that Imus was a less liberal figure than the ones sirs had in mind, otherwise why the comparison?
But maybe all you have proven is that Gore and Kerry have some relatively conservative backers if a racist prick like Imus supports them and assumes that his base audience does as well.
Thank you for setting me straight on Imus' "liberalism." I don't think it changes the essence of my answer though, even if I didn't realize at the time that Imus supported some "liberal" causes. Gore and Kerry are BOTH war supporters who flipped. They're no Howard Dean, that's for sure. So I'm not sure that supporting them makes anyone a "liberal." I would say that fabricating the fiction of left-wingers who get away with more than Imus did is a defence of Imus for two reasons: One, there are no left-wingers who get away with this kind of shit and two, even if there were, it doesn't really get Imus off the hook, it just deflects the debate off him (which any smart defender would strive to do) and defuses the issue by broadening it till Imus is just a tiny part of the problem and therefore gets to keep his job.
-
Even though no liberal commentator in the real world actually come anywhere close to what Imus said.
Errrr, I was under the impression that Imus was a liberal. He supported Gore and Kerry, after all, and he runs several "green" projects.
Not to mention the fact I can't count how often the left, be it pundits, talk show hosts, or celebrities, have called Bush a fascist if not a racist, Republicans racist homophobes, yada, blah, etc. Donna Brazille was literally referring to the GOP as bigots, the party of the "white boys". Spike Lee was joking about Trent Lott's hood & cape, being a card carrying member of the KKK of course. Gloria Alread was gleefully agreeing with a caller that the GOP only had "uncle Toms" in their party. And Blacks, specifically those that lean left, can call any other blacks ni**ers, and that's perfectly acceptable. That all gets a pass, but if a white fella dares to cross a line that demeans blacks, as egregious & idiotic a statement it was, he's raked over the coals.....as he should be. Nice hypocrisy
-
Imus has always spoken like this , does anyone remember when he was invited to speak at a press club dinner where the Clintons (Co-Presidents at that time) were the guests of honor?
Don Imus-". . . .Now I love Ronald Reagan as do most Americans, regardless of politics,
but man, what a weird family. Nancy staring at him like a glass-eyed Moonie on
mushrooms, checking with this nut-log out on the West Coast who's charting the
course of the country on a Ouija board. I mean, what was that all about? And
the kid, Ron, prancing around in his underwear on Saturday Night Live, and
Patty's naked in Playboy and each of them had these Mommie Dearest book deals.
And, of course, they all still hate Michael. . . .
http://www.langston.com/Fun_People/1996/1996APF.html
What really makes this so much worse?
-
<<Not to mention the fact I can't count how often the left, be it pundits, talk show hosts, or celebrities, have called Bush a fascist if not a racist, Republicans racist homophobes, yada, blah, etc. Donna Brazille was literally referring to the GOP as bigots, the party of the "white boys". Spike Lee was joking about Trent Lott's hood & cape, being a card carrying member of the KKK of course. Gloria Alread was gleefully agreeing with a caller that the GOP only had "uncle Toms" in their party. And Blacks, specifically those that lean left, can call any other blacks ni**ers, and that's perfectly acceptable. That all gets a pass, but if a white fella dares to cross a line that demeans blacks, as egregious & idiotic a statement it was, he's raked over the coals.....as he should be. Nice hypocrisy>>
Nice bunch of irrelevant examples. In every one of them, the "left-wingers" were attacking political opponents, in your view (although not in mine) exaggerating wildly as they did so. I suppose this is par for the course in politics - - don't Republicans routinely attack the patriotism of their Democratic opponents, their criminal nature (by comparing abortion to murder) and in the past their "pinko" leanings if not in some cases their active support of communism?
But what political target was Don Imus attacking? He was picking on a bunch of innocent, non-political college girls. All in their teens or early twenties. As usual, you're all fulla shit.
-
..."But maybe all you have proven is that Gore and Kerry have some relatively conservative backers if a racist prick like Imus supports them and assumes that his base audience does as well."
What indicates to you that liberals have fewer or less serious racists than conservatives?
-
<<What really makes this so much worse?>>
That Reagan was in reality a despicable, lying, hypocritical murderer?
-
"don't Republicans routinely attack the patriotism of their Democratic opponents,"
No
" their criminal nature (by comparing abortion to murder)"
Abortion has a diffrence from murder?
"and in the past their "pinko" leanings if not in some cases their active support of communism?"
Only where deserved , it would be hard to make a case for communism against John F Kennedy.
-
<<What indicates to you that liberals have fewer or less serious racists than conservatives?>>
Ahh, no you don't. We've been through that before. The Southern Strategy. Trent Lott. Senator Macacawitz. The way the blacks vote (unless they're all too stupid to know who's for them and who's against them) The history of the Civil Rights movement. Who voted for, who voted against.
Sorry, plane, I'm not getting into THAT again. Hours and hours of it done and done. If you really want to know what indicates to me that liberals have fewer or less serious racists than conservatives, head for the archives.
-
<<What really makes this so much worse?>>
That Reagan was in reality a despicable, lying, hypocritical murderer?
See?
Talking like that is Ok for you and is Ok when directed against a wasp.
If you had a single standard you wouldn't struggle so often with question of Hypocrisy.
Of course I don't mean you specificily , but everyone who has a light standard in one direction and a heavy standard in the other.
-
<<What indicates to you that liberals have fewer or less serious racists than conservatives?>>
Ahh, no you don't. We've been through that before. The Southern Strategy. Trent Lott. Senator Macacawitz. The way the blacks vote (unless they're all too stupid to know who's for them and who's against them) The history of the Civil Rights movement. Who voted for, who voted against.
Sorry, plane, I'm not getting into THAT again. Hours and hours of it done and done. If you really want to know what indicates to me that liberals have fewer or less serious racists than conservatives, head for the archives.
If you knew the historyof the civil rights movement you wouldn't leave Republicans out of it.
Was the southern strategy served by introduceing and voteing n the civil rights act?
Arcives indeed, the public record is the arcive you should check.
-
spin...rationalize...rant
Yea, I got it Tee. It's ok when the left/libs pull out blatantly racist garbage, be it commentary or cartoons, especially aimed at conservatives or anything remotely connected to Bush. It's an egregious front to civility, morality, and downright racist when the right supposedly does it. Yea, I got it the 1st time
-
"don't Republicans routinely attack the patriotism of their Democratic opponents,"
No
I beg to differ. YES.
" their criminal nature (by comparing abortion to murder)"
Abortion has a diffrence from murder?
You see? You call your pro-choice opponents murderers.
"and in the past their "pinko" leanings if not in some cases their active support of communism?"
Only where deserved , it would be hard to make a case for communism against John F Kennedy.
Hard to make one against Adlai, and he was smeared repeatedly as a commie. Hard to make one against Helen Geohagen Douglas, and Nixon won his campaign against her with phony charges of communism.
---------------- I don't think character assassination is a monopoly of either party or either side of the liberal-conservative debate, although IMHO, the conservative targets usually are the scumbags they are alleged to be and the liberals are really the good guys. HOWEVER, the point is that Imus was NOT participating in the politics-as-usual practice of character assassination, he was picking on INNOCENT COLLEGE GIRLS, which no conservative is willing to acknowledge, and accusing them of nothing more than being black and female, which he equated to something bad and repulsive. THAT is why he is a racist prick, THAT is where he differs from ALL those "left-wingers" that sirs likes to pretend do the same thing, and THAT is why his ass should be permanently fired from commercial radio. Let him open his own neo-Nazi hate site and spew his venom there, as is his Constitutional right.
-
"don't Republicans routinely attack the patriotism of their Democratic opponents,"
No
I beg to differ. YES.
No.
Find an exmaple that is not from a Democratic or liberal sorce.
-
" their criminal nature (by comparing abortion to murder)"
Abortion has a diffrence from murder?
You see? You call your pro-choice opponents murderers.
Why shouldn't I?
Haven't you made the point that the actual truth is allowable?
No matter how mean?
-
<<See?
<<Talking like that [saying that Reagan was a lying, despicable murderer] is Ok for you and is Ok when directed against a wasp.>>
If you recall, I said pretty much the same about Ariel Sharon, who, last time I checked, was NOT a WASP. It's OK for me because it's the God's own truth and if you want to stick your head in the sand and deny it, that's YOUR problem.
<<If you had a single standard you wouldn't struggle so often with question of Hypocrisy.>>
But I do have a single standard and I don't struggle with the question of hypocrisy.
-
<<Find an exmaple that is not from a Democratic or liberal sorce.>>
Sorry, there are just too many examples to look for. I remember lots of times when the Democrats were accused by their opponents of giving aid and comfort to, emboldening or encouraging the enemies of their country. If you really don't remember any such incidents, we'll have to agree to disagree.
I know what I remember. Why don't you just be honest and tell me in black and white "I do not recall any incidents where a Republican called a Democrat unpatriotic or accused him or her of not supporting American troops or of endangering them?" Write it. Post it. Tell me you never heard of that happening in the past five years. Otherwise I won't waste my time looking for evidence of what I know (and probably you know) is all over the net.
-
HOWEVER, the point is that Imus was NOT participating in the politics-as-usual practice of character assassination, he was picking on INNOCENT COLLEGE GIRLS, which no conservative is willing to acknowledge, and accusing them of nothing more than being black and female, which he equated to something bad and repulsive. THAT is why he is a racist prick, .........."
No, I am a conservative myself and I could agree with this.
Because these girls are innocent of all fault makes this insult especially egregious , the nasty stuff that Imus has said about President Bush is not any nicer but because Bush is the president there is enough excuse to allow more leway in diecting insults twards him. A president shoud expect it and shoud be tough enough to take it as part of the job.
Imus has had insult slinging as a job for years now , if you knew him better you would be less surprised by this incident .
I think that Imus has a liberal leaning that he can exploit to escape this opprobrium after a while , remmber Senator Byrd and his N word? I bet you don't.
-
<<Why shouldn't I? [call pro-choicers murderers?]>>
I don't give a shit. Call'em whatever you like. I was responding to sirs' allegations that many "left-wingers" had said terrible things about their opponents and my point was that many right-wingers say terrible things about theirs.
All you have just done is proven my point. In spades.
-
<<Find an exmaple that is not from a Democratic or liberal sorce.>>
Sorry, there are just too many examples to look for. I remember lots of times when the Democrats were accused by their opponents of giving aid and comfort to, emboldening or encouraging the enemies of their country. If you really don't remember any such incidents, we'll have to agree to disagree.
I know what I remember. Why don't you just be honest and tell me in black and white "I do not recall any incidents where a Republican called a Democrat unpatriotic or accused him or her of not supporting American troops or of endangering them?" Write it. Post it. Tell me you never heard of that happening in the past five years. Otherwise I won't waste my time looking for evidence of what I know (and probably you know) is all over the net.
I only asked for one , but from a sorce that was not accuseing for political purpose , that is what makes getting one so hard.
One
-
<<Why shouldn't I? [call pro-choicers murderers?]>>
I don't give a shit. Call'em whatever you like. I was responding to sirs' allegations that many "left-wingers" had said terrible things about their opponents and my point was that many right-wingers say terrible things about theirs.
All you have just done is proven my point. In spades.
I can't beleive you admit the truth of the accusation .
Even though I do actually think so, I expected you to be in denyal of the humanity of all these many victims.
In an earlyer post you seemed to say that saying nasty things is alright if one thinks them true.
Quote from: Michael Tee on April 10, 2007, 11:32:07 PM
<<What really makes this so much worse?>>
That Reagan was in reality a despicable, lying, hypocritical murderer?
-
<<Imus has had insult slinging as a job for years now , if you knew him better you would be less surprised by this incident .>>
I've never listened to Don Imus. In fact, only a couple of years ago, a friend had to explain to me who Don Imus was. But a lot of people "sling insults" for a job. Don Rickles for example. Jackie Mason was pretty good in his day, too. I guess there's insults and there's insults. This is one I would NOT have expected. From anyone.
<<I think that Imus has a liberal leaning that he can exploit to escape this opprobrium after a while , remmber Senator Byrd and his N word? I bet you don't.>>
More liberal than me you don't get. And I don't think I'd give him a pass. It's beyond Don Imus at this point. And it's beyond the issues of free speech and censorship, which would normally put me on Don's side. It's the message that you need to send out to every American minority. They KNOW there are some things Don Imus COULD get canned for - - pissing on an American flag, for one. Calling black American women killed in Iraq "nappy haired hos." If he DOESN'T get canned for this, millions of Americans are being told in no uncertain terms, "Nobody gives a shit about your dignity and your pride. We care more about our military and our flag than we do about your miserable black asses, so suck it up and move on because WE own the fucking media and you don't."
-
<<I only asked for one , but from a sorce that was not accuseing for political purpose , that is what makes getting one so hard.
<<One >>
If the story is true, what do you care what the source is? Just tell me in writing you don't recall one case in the past five years where a Republican has impugned the patriotism of a Democratic opponent. That shouldn't be hard. Either you know of one such case or you never heard of one.
-
<<Why shouldn't I? [call pro-choicers murderers?]>>
I don't give a shit. Call'em whatever you like. I was responding to sirs' allegations that many "left-wingers" had said terrible things about their opponents and my point was that many right-wingers say terrible things about theirs.
Strange how I never once claimed, or even imnplied the latter doesn't happen. Chalk that up to another patented BS accusation from Tee
-
<<I can't beleive you admit the truth of the accusation .>>
Of course I don't.
<<Even though I do actually think so, I expected you to be in denyal of the humanity of all these many victims.>>
Humanity? You gotta be kidding. Those "victims" are mostly blastocysts.
<<In an earlyer post you seemed to say that saying nasty things is alright if one thinks them true.>>
Yes. That's why I said I don't give a shit WHAT you call pro-lifers. If you think it's true, you are just exercising a Constitutional right as honestly as you can and to the best of your ability. But that doesn't mean that I have to think it's true also.
-
<<I only asked for one , but from a sorce that was not accuseing for political purpose , that is what makes getting one so hard.
<<One >>
If the story is true, what do you care what the source is? Just tell me in writing you don't recall one case in the past five years where a Republican has impugned the patriotism of a Democratic opponent. That shouldn't be hard. Either you know of one such case or you never heard of one.
Becuse this story is only found from Democratic sorces , you can't go to any origonal sorce for it because it isn't there.
I live in Georgia and I voted once for Max Clealand then against him , I was intensely interested in the race .
What I saw was Max Cleland cry foul and he was lieing.
-
<<I can't beleive you admit the truth of the accusation .>>
Of course I don't.
<<Even though I do actually think so, I expected you to be in denyal of the humanity of all these many victims.>>
Humanity? You gotta be kidding. Those "victims" are mostly blastocysts.
<<In an earlyer post you seemed to say that saying nasty things is alright if one thinks them true.>>
Yes. That's why I said I don't give a shit WHAT you call pro-lifers. If you think it's true, you are just exercising a Constitutional right as honestly as you can and to the best of your ability. But that doesn't mean that I have to think it's true also.
I can't require you to face facts , but why did you bring this up?
-
My 16-year-old son and I were listening to the athletes speak at their news conference.
He didn't get why Imus said what he said. What made him say it?
I told him that as far as I could figure out, if women aren't in their proper role as smiling, lipsticked nicely dressed submissive helpmeets, they're fair game. These girls were playing a very good game of basketball, were athletic in build, not submissive, competetive, not at all like the picture-perfect Donna Reed type that would be beyond reproach.
So they get called those names on national TV. It's abuse, verbal abuse, as far as I can tell elicited by their lack of conformity to what's considered the norm for female looks and behavior.
So, is it even remotely possible to add any more stereotypes in a post?
-
<<Strange how I never once claimed, or even imnplied the latter [Republicans or conservatives saying terrible things about their opponents] doesn't happen. >>
I think, if you follow the thread (I admit, it's a two-string thread because it involves an MT-sirs dialogue and an MT-plane dialogue) you will see that my point was that both sides insult their opponents in the political arena (which all of your examples were drawn from) and that this is different qualitatively from the Imus insult, which involved a broadcaster insulting a sector of the general public. It was anything BUT politics as usual, and the girls had NOT volunteered to face that kind of insult by entering a public arena of no-holds-barred political competition.
Whether or not you claimed or implied that Republicans or conservatives never smeared their opponents just wasn't an issue. I didn't knowingly make it an issue, and I don't see where that became an issue. Frankly, I don't see the point of your objection.
-
<<Strange how I never once claimed, or even imnplied the latter [Republicans or conservatives saying terrible things about their opponents] doesn't happen. >>
I think, if you follow the thread (I admit, it's a two-string thread because it involves an MT-sirs dialogue and an MT-plane dialogue) you will see that my point was that both sides insult their opponents in the political arena (which all of your examples were drawn from) and that this is different qualitatively from the Imus insult, which involved a broadcaster insulting a sector of the general public. It was anything BUT politics as usual, and the girls had NOT volunteered to face that kind of insult by entering a public arena of no-holds-barred political competition.
Whether or not you claimed or implied that Republicans or conservatives never smeared their opponents just wasn't an issue. I didn't knowingly make it an issue, and I don't see where that became an issue. Frankly, I don't see the point of your objection.
I think we could agree that there is a diffrence beteen insulting a political rival and insulting someone who is not asking for it .
-
<<I can't require you to face facts , but why did you bring this up?>>
I mentioned it in passing. The point of departure was sirs' examples of "left-wingers" being equally as bad as Imus in their insults. I pointed out that all his examples were from the political arena. I said that right-wingers were equally guilty. Either because I was challenged on that last comment, or maybe purely voluntarily, I then gave some examples of right-wing verbal abuse of their opponents. One of the latter examples was the allegations of criminality (murder) that graced the abortion debates. You then stepped up to the plate to turn my example (which was meant for the Imus debate) into the main event, a debate in its own right, by asking why you shouldn't call pro-lifers murderers, and i said (still focused on the Imus debate) that I really didn't give a shit what you called them, because you had actually proved the point I was trying to make.
So instead of asking why I brought this up, maybe you should have asked why did you yourself focus on this example - - when it was only a passing example, of which I gave more than one, meant to move along the Imus debate.
-
<<I think we could agree that there is a diffrence beteen insulting a political rival and insulting someone who is not asking for it .>>
Well, yeah. I think that's where most of the outrage comes from. These kids were just studying hard and playing ball. I'm the father of two grown daughters myself. That would have had to hurt. Where does this asshole get off?
-
I haven't seen this much barking since the cable guy tried to get into our backyard. Sheesh.
-
<<I haven't seen this much barking since the cable guy tried to get into our backyard. Sheesh.>>
It's called empathy. Visit our planet a little more often. Get used to it.
-
my point was that both sides insult their opponents in the political arena
Which no one I'm aware of has denied. So why you brought it up is beyond me. The point I was making was in demonstrating how you consistently, and still are I might add, finding ways to rationalize and give a pass to leftist commentators, celebs, & pundits for their blatantly racist remarks & cartoons, when they happen to be aimed at the right, but have no problem falling all over yourself in literally proclaiming all the GOP as one big racist organization. Especially any republican having to do with the south or Bush
Whether or not you claimed or implied that Republicans or conservatives never smeared their opponents just wasn't an issue. I didn't knowingly make it an issue, and I don't see where that became an issue.
I don't either, and yet you still brought it up. I wonder why, given your complete absence of examples implying that it doesn't happen
-
My 16-year-old son and I were listening to the athletes speak at their news conference.
He didn't get why Imus said what he said. What made him say it?
I told him that as far as I could figure out, if women aren't in their proper role as smiling, lipsticked nicely dressed submissive helpmeets, they're fair game. These girls were playing a very good game of basketball, were athletic in build, not submissive, competetive, not at all like the picture-perfect Donna Reed type that would be beyond reproach.
So they get called those names on national TV. It's abuse, verbal abuse, as far as I can tell elicited by their lack of conformity to what's considered the norm for female looks and behavior.
So, is it even remotely possible to add any more stereotypes in a post?
Sure.
-
Here's a few more toons to highlight the double standard I was alluding to earlier (which for some, the disclaimer must be made that this is in no way defending what Imus said)
(http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/07.04.10.OffColor.jpg)
(http://cagle.msnbc.com/working/070410/arial.gif)
(http://cagle.msnbc.com/working/070410/lester.jpg)
-
It's called empathy. Visit our planet a little more often. Get used to it.
I have serious doubts that the bickering going on between you and Sirs springs from empathy. Though I like the "Visit our planet" bit. That was cute. Maybe the people shocked, shocked! that Don Imus said something offensive and insulting should consider visiting our planet a little more often. Yeah, what he said was insulting and really, really stupid, but I can't believe this is even a little bit newsworthy.
"This just in... an offensive and idiotic shock jock said something offensive, idiotic and shocking on the air today... we'll have the full story for you tonight at eleven. Coming up is our in-depth and investigative report on the surprising revelation that Pope Benedict XVI is really a Catholic. But first here on Channel X News, where we cover the stories that matter to you, a report on whether bears actually shit in the woods..."
-
Maybe the people shocked, shocked! that Don Imus said something offensive and insulting should consider visiting our planet a little more often. Yeah, what he said was insulting and really, really stupid, but I can't believe this is even a little bit newsworthy.
"This just in... an offensive and idiotic shock jock said something offensive, idiotic and shocking on the air today... we'll have the full story for you tonight at eleven...."
And don't forget to run it as the top news story for.....oh a week, at least
-
<<Which no one I'm aware of has denied. So why you brought it up [that both sides almost routinely vilify their political opponents] is beyond me. >>
That's OK. There are a lot of things, sirs, which seem to be beyond you. Let me help you, then. I brought it up because you seemed to be totally unaware of the phenomenon. You seemed to be totally unaware of the phenomenon because you used several rather clear and unmistakeable examples of it as "proof" that "left-wingers" had spewed out the same kind of racist garbage as Don Imus, and in an (apparently hopeless) attempt to show you the difference, felt that you might understand the difference more easily if you first recognized your examples for what they were. (The next step being, having recognized your own examples for what they were, you might more clearly see how Imus' contribution to the art of character assassination differed from them.) That's why I brought it up. And to show the non-partisan nature of my remark, I took extra pains to show that not only left-wingers but also right-wingers indulged in this sort of thing. Maybe you already knew that. Maybe you didn't. It was a gratuitous aside, nothing to do with the main thrust of my argument, just a little precaution to ensure that you or some other fascist lunatic would not provoke a side-issue conflict over which side does it more.
<<The point I was making was in demonstrating how you consistently, and still are I might add, finding ways to rationalize and give a pass to leftist commentators, celebs, & pundits for their blatantly racist remarks & cartoons, when they happen to be aimed at the right, but have no problem falling all over yourself in literally proclaiming all the GOP as one big racist organization. Especially any republican having to do with the south or Bush>>
Bush is a lying, torturing, murdering, cowardly and incompetent bastard, pure and simple. There are very few cartoons that could go over the line in describing Bush. There IS no line. This guy is a major war criminal responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of human beings and in a just world would be on trial for his life. Republicans "having to do with the South" are mostly closet (and in the cases of Trent Lott, Senator Macacawitz and others, not even closet) racists or apologists and enablers for racists, and I congratulate any cartoonists who have the balls to take them on. If you DON'T think the GOP (in the South) is one big racist organization, read up on Goldwater's Southern Strategy and how it has played out from the Sixties till the present day. (Reservation: check out BT's point that the focus of the GOP's southern strategy now is more yuppie-centred - - I haven't read up on it but I'd want to know how many of those "new southerners" are actually white-flight emigres from the north, i.e., different kinds of racists than the old south produced, but racists none the less.)
Anyway I don't attack cartoonists for promoting my own view of things, if that's what you mean, and I don't think you are any different in that respect either. But the difference is that I don't support misogyny or racism, so I don't have to defend racist or misogynist cartoonists, and you do.
-
<<Here's a few more toons to highlight the double standard I was alluding to earlier (which for some, the disclaimer must be made that this is in no way defending what Imus said)>>
Thanks. The first one was actually funny, as well as being a good example of non-demeaning caricature (unlike the offensive and insulting Rosie-the-Blob cartoon.)
The other two were inoffensive, but I didn't really see the relevance of them. Rap and hip-hop use the language of the streets and so what? Imus is neither a rapper nor a hip-hopper. Besides which, the inference seemed to be that most of the anger focused on Imus was coming from rap and hip-hop sources, which is bullshit. NONE of the talking heads that I've seen taking a verbal swing at the guy were from anything even close to rap or hip-hop.
-
<<I have serious doubts that the bickering going on between you and Sirs springs from empathy. >>
Of course not, doctor. Actually it springs from deep-seated infantile conflicts I had with my mother, and in sirs' case from a tragic and traumatic fire that he witnessed when he was still in diapers. How fortunate we are to have your phenomenal insight into the human psyche at our disposal. How COULD one feel any empathy for those nappy-headed hos and their parents anyway? That would make absolutely no sense at all.
<<Yeah, what he said was insulting and really, really stupid, but I can't believe this is even a little bit newsworthy. >>
Uhh, let me clue you in. The issue is no longer what the guy said. His JOB is on the line, get it? The issue is how, and whether, he can save his ass. Who he's gonna crawl to for help, what good is any of it gonna do for him. Who's gonna help him, who's gonna not. And THAT'S newsworthy, (a) because the great American public loves dramas of sin and redemption, guys falling into a self-dug pit and then against all odds, digging themselves out of it and (b) because the outcome will say something about core American values, at least at the corporate level, the megabucks that they can make out of a mouth like Imus' versus the hurt and insult that will be felt in millions of low-rent (and a few high-rent) homes if the racist prick doesn't get the axe. Get it now? THAT'S what's newsworthy.
-
<<And don't forget to run it as the top news story for.....oh a week, at least>>
What do you care how long it runs? It's taking the focus off your "President's" Iraq disaster, isn't it?
-
How fortunate we are to have your phenomenal insight into the human psyche at our disposal.
Damn right you are.
How COULD one feel any empathy for those nappy-headed hos and their parents anyway? That would make absolutely no sense at all.
Oh I am sure someone could. But comments like "Oh yea, I forgot, it's Tee-leaf logic." and "Bush is a lying, torturing, murdering, cowardly and incompetent bastard, pure and simple." give no appearance whatever of expressing empathy for the basketball players. And frankly, I doubt that requires phenomenal insight to figure out.
Uhh, let me clue you in. The issue is no longer what the guy said. His JOB is on the line, get it? The issue is how, and whether, he can save his ass. Who he's gonna crawl to for help, what good is any of it gonna do for him. Who's gonna help him, who's gonna not. And THAT'S newsworthy, (a) because the great American public loves dramas of sin and redemption, guys falling into a self-dug pit and then against all odds, digging themselves out of it and (b) because the outcome will say something about core American values, at least at the corporate level, the megabucks that they can make out of a mouth like Imus' versus the hurt and insult that will be felt in millions of low-rent (and a few high-rent) homes if the racist prick doesn't get the axe. Get it now? THAT'S what's newsworthy.
The outcome will say something about core American values? Yeah, and the plaid pixies live in a hole in the sky where they keep Amelia Earhart as their queen. The hurt and insult felt if he doesn't get the axe? Yeah, now pull the other one. Worse things are said by rap artists who have a bigger audience and make as much or more money than Imus does.
This story is next to meaningless. It provides an excuse for people to express pointless outrage and puff themselves up as moralistic champions of pharisaical righteousness. Ah yes, we're all condemning Don Imus and his racist comments, so aren't we fine and good, harrumph, harrumph, harrumph. Excrement.
If the folks making so loud a fuss over Imus all really gave so much as half a damn about it, there is a lot more out there that would draw their ire. But in a few weeks, their ire will again be safely packed away and this incident will be largely forgotten. And everyday racism will continue unattended by the folks who are now beating their chests. If this story says anything at all about core American values, that would be it.
The attempt to conflate this into some sort of profound news story is a load of excrement. It's not news worthy. It's laughable at best. The man is a joke and all this story has succeeded in doing is giving his radio and TV show a temporary ratings boost. Way to go! I wonder how all those hurt people in those millions of low income homes feel about that.
Anyway, say whatever else you will, I'm done here.
-
What does income have to do with your rant?
Why should a low income black feel more pain that a middle or high income black?
What does Imus's income have to do with this?
-
<<Which no one I'm aware of has denied. So why you brought it up [that both sides almost routinely vilify their political opponents] is beyond me. >>
I brought it up because you seemed to be totally unaware of the phenomenon.
Start with a false premise and......well, no need to go any further.
Anyway I don't attack cartoonists for promoting my own view of things, if that's what you mean, and I don't think you are any different in that respect either.
Well, at least you're honest in supporting hypocrisy and racist commentary/toons, when it happens to coincide with your ideological hatred for those who don't think like Tee. Personally, my bar isn't that low
-
Imus' comment was less than intelligent.
CBS and NBC are making a big deal out of the whole thing for reasons other than Imus' comment. Either they are wanting to extract a sufficient pound of flesh in order to keep the advertising dollars rolling in or they don't like Imus and want him gone.
If Imus had said this and there had been a major story out like, say, I don't know, the Attorney General of the United States being subpoenaed by Congress then this wouldn't have been more than a blip story before going to commercial. Oh wait...
Seriously though, I have to say, they really are making this out to be waaaay more than it is. He's a dumbass and shouldn't have a radio show but what he said wasn't worthy of his being fired. Especially since he's gone waaaaay out of his way to apologize and make up for it. The Rutger's coach and one of the players were on the Today show this morning and the coach dismissed it out of hand when she first heard about it but then allegedly someone showed her the "script" and the context and that's when she became outraged. I suspect it was after a call from Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton or both that she really got pissed off.
-
Brass, I strongly disagree with you. Made way more out of it than it is? You don't get it.
What if someone called your child a comparable name of a sexual nature, out of the blue, on live radio/tv? I don't think you'd say, Oh, it was no biggie, the man's an asshole, always has been, move along.
-
<< But comments like . . . "Bush is a lying, torturing, murdering, cowardly and incompetent bastard, pure and simple." give no appearance whatever of expressing empathy for the basketball players. And frankly, I doubt that requires phenomenal insight to figure out.>>
Phenomenal insight? What does phenomenal insight have to do with the pathetically off-the-mark conclusions you draw, seemingly out of thin air? If I were you, I'd aspire first to garden-variety mediocre insight, just enough to know how to read in context - - you'd realize that the remark that you quoted was in response to sirs' complaint that I failed to protest "unfair" depictions of your murderous "President" by various "left-wing" toonists. sirs' point and my response had absolutely nothing to do with empathy for the basketball players, both related to a side-issue. That's what happens in debate, side issues can arise, the issues of which have nothing necessarily to do with the main issue.
<<The outcome will say something about core American values? Yeah, and the plaid pixies live in a hole in the sky where they keep Amelia Earhart as their queen. The hurt and insult felt if he doesn't get the axe? Yeah, now pull the other one. Worse things are said by rap artists who have a bigger audience and make as much or more money than Imus does.>>
Yeah? No shit? Rappers have already singled out a real-life girls' college team and called them a bunch a napppy-headed hos? No waaay, man, that is so bad. I had no idea. So Imus isn't even an original. Why shame on him. He'll never make it in rap world.
<<If the folks making so loud a fuss over Imus all really gave so much as half a damn about it . . . >>
Whoah, we are indeed privileged here, folks. Doubly blessed, as the renowned Dr. Prince is again willing to share his profound psychological insight with us peons here and read for us the minds of all those phonies who object to Imus' racst and sexist rant.
<< . . . there is a lot more out there that would draw their ire. >>
Oh, I know, I know. sirs has already clued us in to those uncounted thousands of nameless, faceless (but nevertheless, prominent in the media) "left-wingers" who spew far worse vile, disgusting and vulgar things in public, all day, every day, 24/7.
<<But in a few weeks, their ire will again be safely packed away and this incident will be largely forgotten . . . >>
Well, of course. How could it be otherwise when insincere, phony, "left-wing" hypocrites control the mass media and set its agenda. In a few weeks, they'll get back to their real agenda, which is the War on Christmas, the promotion of sexual perversion and the destruction of the American family. Oh, yeah, and the victory of al Qaeda.
<<It provides an excuse for people to express pointless outrage . . . >>
Yeah, why bother expressing "pointless outrage" when we could all get together behind Don and bash those nappy-headed hos one more time? THAT'S what I call meaningful political expression. Fuck those bitches, who the hell do they think they are anyway?
<<And everyday racism will continue unattended by the folks who are now beating their chests.>>
WHAT???? You mean American racism WON'T come to a crashing halt if Imus' ass is fired? I am shocked, I tell you . . . SHOCKED.
<<It's not news worthy>>
NAAAH, I'll tell ya what's newsworthy. The paternity of Anna Nicole Smith's baby, THAT'S newsworthy. McCain's stroll in the Baghdad market, THAT'S newsworthy. The 14th biggest (by audience) commentator in the U.S. (and by one weekly newsmagazine's reckoning, one of the 100 most influential people in the country) trashing a team of unsuspecting, unoffending women basketball players with racist and sexist insults newsworthy? Don't make me laugh. It's just everyday racism-as-usual in the good old U.S. of A., the greatest democracy on the face of the earth. Keep right on moving, folks, nothing to see here. All's well in the nation, bub, those are some happy little jigaboos there, let me tell you.
<<all this story has succeeded in doing is giving his radio and TV show a temporary ratings boost. Way to go! I wonder how all those hurt people in those millions of low income homes feel about that.>>
I'm really touched by this sudden humility. The great psychologist who can read my mind and detect my hypocrisy and lack of real empathy in the blink of an eye is baffled by how the poor blacks will feel about the guy who publicly insulted them getting nothing more than a ratings boost out of his openly expressed contempt. Why not try all the possibilities and eliminate them one by one? Elation. How about elation? Would they feel elated if nothing but a big ratings boost was all that Imus got out of this? No? Well, then, jubilation - - would they be jubilant about it? Keep on trying, Prince . . . I'm sure you can figure it out. Eventually. You just have to concentrate a little more, and try not to be distracted by those feelings of your own superiority to the rest of us.
<<Anyway, say whatever else you will,>>
Why, thankee, boss. I believe I just did.
-
Brass, I strongly disagree with you. Made way more out of it than it is? You don't get it. What if someone called your child a comparable name of a sexual nature, out of the blue, on live radio/tv?
Or.......murdering bastard, fascist totalitarian, utter incompotent moron, want women to die of cancer, etc., etc., etc.? Oh wait, that's ok, it's no biggie if it's aimed at someone(s) you're not too keen with. It's only a "biggie" when you deem its a biggie.
I don't think you'd say, Oh, it was no biggie, the man's an asshole, always has been, move along.
Yea, Imus is an a**hole. So is nearly the entire hiphop industry that routinely uses such language on their records and LIVe concerts, as are a whole host of Bush bashers, who leave little doubt as to their hatred of the man & the Republican party, be it live radio/TV or web blogs
-
<<Well, at least you're honest in supporting hypocrisy and racist commentary/toons, when it happens to coincide with your ideological hatred for those who don't think like Tee.>>
Still living on your own imaginary little planet, sirs? Toonists and commentators who are on my side of the ideological line aren't racists and don't produce racist material
<<Personally, my bar isn't that low>>
ROTFLMFAO. You're a Bush supporter and your bar isn't "that low?" The moment you decided to support the Smirking Chimp, you threw away any bar you might have had.
-
Toonists and commentators who are on my side of the ideological line aren't racists and don't produce racist material
Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight ::)
-
The vultures circle, replete with their own agendas.
Imus says this, Rosie says that.
and the cry from the rafters is that these speakers of forbidden words should be made to die for their (our) sins.
I have read on these very pages that the Zionists (Jews) are hiding behind the Holocaust as they commit atrocities against the Palestinians.
As always the substance of the words do not matter. It is the symbolic crucifixion that is supreme now.
Bread and circuses.
-
It was just announced on NBC Nightly News that Imus is permanently dropped from MSNBC.
Kudos to NBC.
Perhaps Imus could start his own tiny radio station, emitting from David Duke's basement.
-
It was just announced on NBC Nightly News that Imus is permanently dropped from MSNBC.
Kudos to NBC.
Perhaps Imus could start his own tiny radio station, emitting from David Duke's basement.
Guess you don't realize that Imus' broadcast on MSNBC was just a simulcast, and he still has the same radio audience that he had before?
-
<<and the cry from the rafters is that these speakers of forbidden words should be made to die for their (our) sins. >>
Must be very high up in the rafters. It's a cry I never heard and I doubt anyone else heard it either. You have a very acute sense of hearing, BT. Either that or an extremely overactive imagination.
<<I have read on these very pages that the Zionists (Jews) are hiding behind the Holocaust as they commit atrocities against the Palestinians. >>
Yeah, it's almost as shocking as the fascists (Americans) hiding behind 9-11 as they commit atrocities against the Arabs. Or the Nazis hiding behind the Treaty of Versailles as they commit atrocities against everyone else. What I always admired in you, BT, was the highly selective nature of your bullshit detectors.
<<As always the substance of the words do not matter. >>
Not to you guys, that's for sure.
<<It is the symbolic crucifixion that is supreme now.>>
When was the American public ever permitted to see the real thing?
<<Bread and circuses.>>
LOL. Next you'll be bitching about corporate ownership of the MSM. BT discovering his inner lefty.
-
Riddle me this Mikey.
How many people listen to Imus or Rosie on a daily basis.
How many people if asked on the street could tell you their transgressions.
How did the number multiply expontentially?
To whose advantage?
Is the story really about Imus or Rosie? or is it an explotation of the rifts in our society.
Who profits?
-
<<Is the story really about Imus or Rosie? or is it an explotation of the rifts in our society. >>
You say, exploitation, I say expose (that last "e" needs an acute accent but I can't insert it)
The rest of your questions are the chicken-and-egg questions of what is news and what is media event. Your point seems to be that the media broadened Imus' comments to a wider range than usual, taking in not only the unthinking morons who wouldn't think twice about his comment and bringing it to people more directly affected, people who DO give a shit. Who profits? Well a corporation whose business is selling news will profit, because they found some news - - hey folks, look here's some ass-hole you never listen to but who has been given a national platform anyway, and look what he's saying about your daughters on that platform. Well, it's newsworthy to all those people who HAVE black daughters and who don't listen to Imus to know what that asshole is saying about them. And it's newsworthy to a lot of folks who don't have black daughters but who care about the folks who do, who know the hardness of their fight against racism, who hope that racism will continue to lose force. The only people for whom the story is NOT newsworthy is the people who don't have black daughters and don't give a shit about the people who do.
So you live in a capitalist society and believe that only a profit-seeking corporation can do the best job of baking cakes, making cars, insuring health-care costs, etc. etc. which must also include gathering and disseminating news. But find it objectionable when that profit-seeking corporation finds "news" that you think isn't news, only to boost its profits. All of them find that this kind of "news" is profitable and suddenly their profit-seeking becomes a subject of moral condemnation? BT is shocked! The profit motive suddenly becomes a dirty word, when the profit is turned by exposing racists and racism! THAT'S not how they're supposed to rake in the shekels! They're supposed to rake it in by letting Imus spew his racist venom to his racist audience and pretending that all's well in a democratic non-racist America. Whatasa matta wit dose guys?
-
You say, exploitation, I say expose (that last "e" needs an acute accent but I can't insert it)
XO told you how to do it once already. Hold down the left Alt key, then enter 0233 on the numeric keyboard.
Exposé
I also expanded on it by telling you that you pop up a window that allows you to click on the accented character, and copy it into the paste buffer by selecting Start->All Programs->Accessories->System Tools->Character Map. That window will also tell you the keystroke to use - when you select the accented character, look in the lower right corner of the window. (These instructions are for WinXP, but it's similar for other versions of Windoze.)
-
Thanks, Ami, this time I'm saving the advice to my hard drive.
-
Whatasa matta wit dose guys?
Explain Sharpton and Jacksons role is the evolution and magnification of this story.
Do they profit?
-
(http://www.cagle.com/working/070411/fairrington.jpg)
(http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/20070412RZ1AP-Imus.jpg)
-
Maybe the people shocked, shocked! that Don Imus said something offensive and insulting should consider visiting our planet a little more often. Yeah, what he said was insulting and really, really stupid, but I can't believe this is even a little bit newsworthy.
"This just in... an offensive and idiotic shock jock said something offensive, idiotic and shocking on the air today... we'll have the full story for you tonight at eleven. Coming up is our in-depth and investigative report on the surprising revelation that Pope Benedict XVI is really a Catholic. But first here on Channel X News, where we cover the stories that matter to you, a report on whether bears actually shit in the woods..." [/color]
(http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/PN041307.jpg)
-
<<Explain Sharpton and Jacksons role is the evolution and magnification of this story.
<<Do they profit?>>
Does the Pope shit in the woods? Is a bear Catholic? Why do they rush to the forefront of every one of these stories if there's nothing in it for them? Sure they profit. Big time. Keeps their name in the news. That's millions of bucks worth of free publicity.
-
So the story is no longer about the words uttered it is the hijacking of the story for personal gain, either at the hands of the MSM or the likes of Sharpton and Jackson.
Looks like they are not alone.
(http://hotlineblog.nationaljournal.com/Clinton.JPG)
-
What is the demographic description of the Imus audence?
If they loose Imus where will they go?
This could be good news for someone.
http://www.mediabuyerplanner.com/medium/topic/personalization/
In talk radio -- which in many areas veers into sheer maggot-brain radio -- Don Imus is a loyal friend of country music. For which all true fans of country music should be grateful.
http://www.cmt.com/news/articles/1459229/12192002/id_0.jhtml
"We only need to look at New Orleans after katrina when Imus, before almost anyone else, ranted for a solid week about how the people didn't receive immediate assistance from our govt. because they were poor and black.
We only need to look back a week or 2, when he was flying across the country, and, as part of a charity he participates in, went out of his way to pick up a black child and his mother and fly them to Charlotte because the boy needed to see a doctor for his eye cancer.
We only need to look at his cattle ranch for kids with cancer, where almost half of the kids are minorities.
Regular listeners of the show and people who know him know what a kind (but crazy) guy he is. This craziness is partly what makes him funny. He holds grudges until he forgets why he was mad, and then says: "well, i don't remember what my problem with him/her is, so let's have em back on." It's kind of like the crazy uncle in the family. it's part of the charm."
http://www.coolrunning.com/forums/Forum1/HTML/153481-6.shtml
http://www.newsmax.com/talkradio/
NewsMax's 25 Most
Influential Talk Radio Hosts
1. Rush Limbaugh
2. Bill O'Reilly
3. Don Imus
4. Michael Savage
5. Sean Hannity
6. Laura Ingraham
7. Glenn Beck
8. Dr. Laura Schlessinger
9. Neal Boortz
10. Al Franken
11. Mike Gallagher
12. Mancow
13. Howard Stern
14. Bill Bennett
15. Opie and Anthony
16. Ed Schultz
17. Michael Medved
18. Randi Rhodes
19. Jim Bohannon
20. G. Gordon Liddy
21. Diane Rehm
22. Larry Elder
23. Michael Reagan
24. Tammy Bruce
25. Tom Leykis
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m4021/is_2001_Oct_1/ai_79052842
Like it or not, Talk Radio is the realm of the humans, of the mass, of what we used to call the masses. Talk Radio is the antidote to the hierarchical star systems of Hollywood, TV, electoral politics, and the slumber-inducing discourse that passes for "journalism" in American newspapers and magazines. It's the one place in the media where the hoi polloi can push back against the tyranny of format, where Howard Rheingold's "smart mob" can reestablish the good ol' American disorder upon which this once great nation was built.
http://www.salonchingon.com/readingroom/talkradio.php
-
not fair
I like tom lykus
he`s a complete pig
but I actually get truely useful tips from the guy
I broke up with someone with his advice.
very useful
if it wasn`t for him I might actually be with her now
brrr.
-
<<So the story is no longer about the words uttered it is the hijacking of the story for personal gain, either at the hands of the MSM or the likes of Sharpton and Jackson.
<<Looks like they are not alone. [Hillary puts in her two cents' worth]>>
***************
Oh God, I hope you're not saying that politicians jump on bandwagons. That would be SO disillusioning. Think how disheartened the Schiavo family would feel to hear your latest discovery. Better keep it under wraps for now, BT. You could be wrong, you know. Maybe all of them are sincere. Or at least please God the conservative Republicans.
-
<<I broke up with someone with his advice.
<<very useful
<<if it wasn`t for him I might actually be with her now
<<brrr.>>
The advice that you got from this genius, kimba - - was it by any chance related to the colour of her skin? the kinkiness of her hair?
-
actually yes
I found her too asian
don`t care for that very much
not one bit
-
Jesus, I was just kidding. Imus gave you anti-Asian racist advice? I thought the guy only had it in for black people.
I think you're selling Asian women short, BTW - - I've never been with one, but some of them look pretty damn good to me.
-
not imus
tom lykis
and it wasn`t anti-asian
it was a check list of what behaviour is bad for a mate.
mine was too too clingy
but as a real men I`m too stupid to know this without a radio host to point this out
she was not right for me.
too subverient for my taste
most asian ladies I`vew dated are
yech
-
Imus was extremely foolish to say what he said. Those basketball players did nothing to deserve being called 'hos'. Whether one plays b-ball well or poorly is unrelated to being a prostitute.
Anyone dating a Black woman should remember to NEVER say anything other than compliments about her hair. To do otherwise is to take one's like in one's hands.
On the other hand, Imus is not always a fool about everything. Mostly, he's a curmudgeon.
There are many things more important about a woman than race. It is the individual that matters, and personality is a lot more important than looks. After all, if you can't stand her looks, you would not date her in the first place.