One last thing about Imus- can we please stop the fauxtrage that certain columnist and political leaders are standing by Imus? Some of the people on the left-wing of the political debate are starting to sound like the paranoids at Red State with their media conspiracies. Some of the same people, I might note, who would have (admirably, in my opinion) defended ANYTHING their friend Amanda Marcotte said in order for her to keep her job with Edwards.
Of course they are standing by him. They have long-standing relationships, and they are friends. Imus may be a lot of things, but he was loyal to his friends. What you see/hear on the Imus show most certainly is not all there is to the man, and could go a long way to explain why decent men like Tom Oliphant are standing by Imus. And it is possible to stand by someone while still hating what they have said and done.
As the TNR notes (via Sully), it will be interesting to see how MoDo and Frank Rich react. Another one that will be interesting to watch is Mike Barnicle, who was, for the most part, thrown out of the “clique” for plagiarism a few years back and was wholly rehabilitated by Imus. He made Barnicle less nuclear. People remember that. People understand loyalty.
But I really do think it boils down to friendships and relationships as much or more than it does to Digby’s hypothesis about book sales. I listened to the show quite frequently (every morning, actually, up until about a year ago when I just stopped watching, for whatever reason). The guests and Imus generally liked each other- you could tell that they were friends, and yes, they were clubby.
I guess my whole point is that it is, I think, unfair to attack Oliphant, or David Gregory, or Tim Russert, or whoever, because they will defend a friend. I worked in probation for a while, and at every sentencing, people got up and said good things about the convicted. That doesn’t mean that the convicted is any less guilty, and it surely does not mean that those testifying on behalf of the convicted are awful sell-outs. It is just human nature to try to stand up for your friends.
*** Update ***
This is just a completely unfair attack on James Carville:
Here’s how James Carville defended Imus on CNN just now, saying that they’ve been friends since 1992. After spouting off for about thirty seconds of saying how he really thinks that Imus is genuinely sorry, he gave his real reason for defending Imus.
“I’m a believer that when a friend is in trouble, that’s when you run to their aid.”
And then Carville talked about how Imus has raised lots of money for charity. The other guy, the Republican strategist, actually did some analysis about whether candidates should go on and how Imus relates to cultural conservatives.
It’s striking how Carville’s move to stardom in 1992 colors his whole world. James Carville is no longer a Democratic strategist or analyst, he’s just an insider celebrity.
Look, I was a Clinton hater during the 90’s, and by extension, a Carville hater. I detested him. I thought he was a liar, an opportunist, a hack, and would say and do anything. I felt there was nothing Clinton would do or say that Carville would not excuse. Until I heard Carville speak at my school.
Carville and his wife came to speak one night, and one of the questioners asked Carville how he could sleep with himself defending Clinton even after Clinton admitted to lying to him about Lewinsky and other issues. Carville’s answer was simple:
“Loyalty.”
Clinton gave Carville a shot, and stood by him through thick and thin. Carville, a Marine, did the same, even when he knew his friend was in the wrong. Now we can get into an deep (well, probably not) debate about the magnitude of sins committed by Clinton v. Bush v. Imus, or for the relative merits of being loyal when you know someone is doing wrong (make no mistake, the loyalty used to cover up the disasters in this administration has wreaked unparalleled messes on this nation that will take a long time to fix), but I respect Carville for his loyalty.
Sorry, but I do. Imus has been a friend to him, Carville thinks he knows Imus beyond what is portrayed on the screen and on the radio (and, indeed probably does), and I can respect that. You don’t have to agree with it, but smearing Carville for being loyal to a friend seems beyond the pale. Imus is going to get what is coming to him- lashing out at people for defending their friends seems pointless and unfair.
And believe it or not, I do understand what many are upset about- friendship and loyalty does seem to have replaced honesty and integrity in the media. But I simply can’t attack people for being loyal to their friends.
SomeCallMeTim
People remember that. People understand loyalty.
If I’m remembering correctly, this more or less parallels Steve Gillard’s explanation for the African-American community’s support for Sharpton in the face of the now-standard understanding of the Brawley thing. I leave it to you to decide which group–the media elite vs. the African-American community–has a better reason to stand by its friends simply because it needs friends.
p.lukasiak
and the point of those who are critical of the Gregorys, Russerts, Oliphants, etc is that this “friendship” was based on media exposure/backscratching/logrolling. These media whores show up on Imus for self-promotion, knowing what Imus’ schtick is. Its not about “friendship”, its about the incestuous and destructive relationship that has turned the mainstream media into complete crap.
John Cole
It is about both. You are just choosing to discount half the equation.
don surber
Whatever happened to while not agreeing with what a person says, defending a person’s right to say it?
Pooh
While I think what Imus said was pretty vile, A) I don’t think it’s a fireable offense (his job is to say outlandish things – he went over the line, reprimand him, put him on notice not to do it again, etc. The suspension is fine by me); B) I agree with John in that we shouldn’t castigate people for defending a friend – now, to the extent that people are defending him by trying to intimate that the comments were ok, that’s a problem.
Andrew
It went away when all the conservatives turned into worshipful authoritarian followers.
But I blame the left for that.
p.lukasiak
no i’m not John. I’m saying that the “friendship” is based on the “incestuous and destructive relationship that has turned the mainstream media into complete crap.”
Imus has been a complete ass for ages. The people who are his “friends” know he’s been a complete ass for ages — but still “befriended” him. If I know someone is a racist scumbag, I avoid them — I don’t “befriend” them because I think it will advance my own personal interests.
You’re mileage, of course, may vary.
empty
True.
ThymeZone
Totally agree.
Yes, a reasonable answer to Surber’s reasonable question.
Well, except for the “all” part, they didn’t all do that, but enough did, and the spokesmen did.
Davebo
You seem pretty sure of yourself here John. May I ask what you are basing this on?
Do you have some experience with Imus’ supposed loyalty or friendship with others in politics and the media?
And Pooh.
Of course it’s a fireable offense. When was the last time you saw Kanye West perform at a televised fund raiser?
Richard Bottoms
Fuck Imus.
I am sure the nappy headed ho’s at Rutgers don’t give a rat’s ass about Imus’ friends or how loyal he has been to them. He’s not some obscure shock jock, he is a media power broker who obviously doesn’t respect black folks enough.
And it’s not the words themselves, it is his attitude. The Jon Stewart show did a segment on the word nigger that was very funny and insightful. We KNOW the difference.
In the 60’s black people made a pact with this country: We won’t make this place like Northern Ireland or Algeria, by taking our demands for human dignity the insurgency route. In return there’s going to be a recognition that the descendents of slaves will have their feelings respected a little bit more so than other groups.
That means you can’t call me nigger unless I say it’s oaky but I can say nigga, please to my best friend, and you just have to live wit the unfairness of it all.
That’s the trade off.
Those of us old enough to remember Tillman and the four little girls in Atlanta and rest of the indignities (that as far as human history is concerned happened almost yesterday) won’t make this place like Lebanon, Iraq, Bosnia, Turkey, the Basque Region, or any other place where people are killing each other over 1,000 year old grievences.
MLK made that possible.
And the price you pay for that relative peace is shitheads like Don Imus get their asses canned.
Not a bad trade.
John Cole
Kanye West and the look on Mike Myers face is still one of the greatest televised moments in the past fifty years.
I think West is an idiot- Bush is an incompetent boob, not a racist, but I could watch the look on Mike Myer’s face all day.
jh
THANK YOU RICHARD.
Richard Bottoms
Imus has a right to say whatever the fuck he wants. MSNBC has no obligation to broadcast it though.
The first amendment protects me from George Bush directing the federal government to prevent Imus from call black athletes nappy headed ho’s.
It has nothing at all to do with GE firing his ass.
Jimmmm
Defend Imus, but don’t defend what he did. Fineman and Olyphant appear to have trouble making that distinction.
Pb
John, you must be following this thing way more closely than I am, because that’s far too subtle for me. Some people say? Got anyone in mind? Who’s allegedly standing by Imus, and who’s alleging it? Anyone?
Mr Furious
Yup.
At what point is the greif from Imus worth cutting him loose? As John mentioned, this is purely business for NBC. That’s almost more offensive than Imus himself. He is an old fucking codger with nothing left on his comedy fastball, so he throws meatballs like that up there. NBC is making a calculated decision how much racism is worth it to their bottom line.
Richard Bottoms
Yes, but at least a racist might have had the sense to order the 82nd Airborne to drop into New Orleans to rescue those people the next day.
If the man’s policies hurt black people what do I care if you think he’s a racist?
If you’re in Bhagram airbase with your nuts tied to a telephone do you really wonder if GW likes brown people?
Evil is as evil does, not what it intends.
Smitty
Imus has made racist comments. Calling Senator Campbell from Colorado the “guy from F-Troop” is certainly racist, given which of the character he was talking about. Calling the Knicks chest-thumping pimps? I mean, they do suck and everything, but that’s an insult moving well-towards a racist attitude.
Imus has defended himself by saying that he spreads his insults broadly. Calling Colin Powell a weasel isn’t racist. But many other comments are, and many comments he made including the ones aimed at the Rutgers team certainly are. What Imus and guys like him miss is that spreading insults broadly, as well as spreading racist comments around, is equally bad. Spreading insults is fine. The blogosphere is pretty much based on that principle. But covering all of your racist bases doesn’t make racism okay. Only attacking blacks is no less evil than attacking all racial minorities, yet that’s what Imus’s response implies; “hey, I call everyone by their epithet, so I’m not racist because I’m not just after 1 specific group. I spread the hate around.” He’s an asshole, and I’m with Richard Bottom’s comments. I am saddened (but not terribly surprised) that guys like Imus still have an audience. But it’s also not some “conservative versus liberal” problem with media content. It’s just about an asshole being an asshole.
Pooh
Richard, that’s a good point. I was actually thinking of the Jon Stewart bit. The biggest difference, for me (and your mileage probably varies greatly) was that one was funny and one was not. Given that I think we’re too uptight as a culture anyway, in general I don’t want to discourage humor by punishing failed attempts (see Kerry, John). Now, given the racial context of Imus’ remarks, this is clearly dicier ground, and as a white guy, I probably don’t have too much of a leg to stand on. (But then, as a Jew and a lawyer, I also wasn’t really offended by Michael Ray Richardson’s recent remarks about his “crafty Jew lawyers”.)
Richard Bottoms
You only have to read this to know why we black folks are hopping mad about Imus:
Ga. senior class to try integrated prom
Opera is a billionaire, we have a black (though incompetent) secretary of state, a black man may very well be president and meanwhile in Georgia it’s yet to dawn on some folks that blacks and whites are equal.
You just don’t understand how close this country was to splitting in two.
My father was an officer in the United States Army in World War II and he rode the Jim Crow car back from his commissioning in Washington. I remember the pain of his describing how a college educated man was made to accept that indignity from a country he was ready to fight for.
I knew I was not going to take one second of the shit my father took when I became a man. The choice I was facing was give me my rights America or I’ll come take them, by force if necessary.
I am 52 years old and I still burn with that anger, but now all I demand is that you keep people like Don Imus from positions of respect and a forum for his foolishness.
Even if you don’t “get” it.
Richard Bottoms
I don’t spend my time worrying about what white folks think or do. All I ask is that the cops don’t shoot me (Diallo) and justice be fair (Innocence Project).
I’ll do the rest on my own.
JC
I get your point about standing by your friends. It is human nature.
The larger social point – that a “clubbiness” has formed, that is based on mutually advantageous backscratching, isn’t made less true though, by the matter of loyalty.
It’s actually interesting how a characteristic which is, and should be, admired – loyalty, and standing by your friends – is actually mutually reinforced by a media/political system, that goes along to get along, in this case, the Beltway syndrome.
I have no doubt that, in many ways, Imus stood by democrats who were his friends, and was able to be generous and gracious with his guests, so that they were helped. And it is natural to want to help back.
People – us – we are complicated. I would bet that, despite the deep deep disdain that 97% of the visiting population to Balloon Juice has for George Bush, (including me), I am pretty sure that the vast majority of those people, if you were to meet George Bush, would say something along the lines of “It’s an honor to meet you Mr. President”, or some variation on that. At some point, if given an opportunity, I might say, “I have some concerns that I’d like you to hear”, while on my mind would be “why have you put partisanship over principles??”.
Because to do otherwise would be rude – disrespecting the office of the President, even while I no longer respect the man who is president.
Am I alone in this? What would you do if you met G.W?
Bruce Moomaw
As far as I’m concerned, Imus (like so many other radio hosts) is just a generalized professional knuckle-dragger who will say ANYTHING offensive and stupid — independent of any actual political ideology of his own — in order to draw an audience consisting mostly (as Matt Yglesias notes this morning) of 11- to 16-year-old boys. Like Howard Stern, he’s the sort of thing you usually spray for; and the fact that they have a large audience in the first place is just further evidence for Spengler and Toynbee’s views on the cyclical collapse of civilizations.
p.lukasiak
And it’s not the words themselves, it is his attitude. The Jon Stewart show did a segment on the word nigger that was very funny and insightful. We KNOW the difference.
the other thing is that Imus had no “insulation”. Howard Stern has been just as racist and misogynist as Imus, but he has Robin Quivers there — and she’s not afraid to call him on his crap when he goes to far.
Rome Again
Stand up for your friends is one thing, but do you reward a dog with a bone when he’s just piddled on the floor? That just creates a negative Pavlovian response, does it not?
p.lukasiak
I’d probably do something along the lines of what Jim Tester did…. try to avoid him, then try to ignore him, and if he insisted upon being acknowledged, tell him to fuck off.
Andrew
Once upon a time in the history of our country, some people might have said that respect is earned and not given away just because of a position.
Instead, we have fealty to our “Commander-in-Chief” (he ain’t my commander) and respect for the office of the President (like Newt in the 90’s!), except for those foul mouthed bloggers who say “fuck” a lot and don’t show appropriate worshipfulness.
Rome Again
I worship no man, sir… (well, except perhaps maybe possibly one).
Andrew
Time for a guessing game. Winner gets a date with Rome.
My guess: Josh Hartnett.
I am right or what?
Pb
Ok, say no more, I found the conspiracy theorists.
Pb
I’ll go with Hugh Hewitt.
Cyrus
Well, I like to think that I’d do what Bill Hangley, Jr. or Jim Webb did: if he tried to get into kissing-hands-and-shaking-babies mode with me, I’d politely but firmly tell him that I think very little of how he’s done the job. But unlike either of those guys, I carry a digital voice recorder almost everywhere I go for my job, and I’d be sure to have it turned on at the time.
More realistically though, I would probably feel too nervous activating a small electronic device while watching the president and then waiting eagerly for him to come closer. Call me a coward, but the Secret Service might take it the wrong way.
Richard 23
The left hates freedom and supports “hate crime” legislation. What Imus said (I don’t listen to the guy so really don’t care) would be a jailable hate crime if the fascist left had their way.
Freedom of speech and freedom of thought outside their leftist echo chambers is too frightening for them. Someone might get insulted. Oh noes!
Notice also how they try to keep conservative speakers off college campuses and boo them and shout them down when they attempt to speak. They can’t help their fascist tendencies. It’s who they are.
Richard 23
Blush, blush. I thought you weren’t going to tell….
mrmobi
Ok, put down the crack pipe. No one here said Imus should go to jail. I’d vote to allow the young women he smeared kick the shit out of him if they wanted to. But you know what, they are almost certainly better educated than Imus, they have probably forgiven him already.
I’m sure they understand that it’s not nice to be mean to old, demented people.
mrmobi
Only by your poor spoofing.
Are you guys still harping on the “political correctness” bullshit?
Jeebus, get yourself up to date, will ya?
Don
I suppose I can understand the outrage from people who are offended, though I don’t understand how they could be in any way shocked or surprised if they’d heard the name “Imus” before. I can’t decide if I am boggled or offended that MSNBC et all have reacted this way. NOBODY who has ever heard Imus could be shocked by this, and if you’re going to suspend him over this incident because you really did just suddenly notice what he’s like then you should be honest and intelligent about it and just can him.
Imus is Imus and they should broadcast him or not, but pretending this is some kind of one-off is insulting to everyone. Honestly, I have more respect to J Jackson in this than I do MSNBC. He’s at least calling it honestly: a 2 week suspension doesn’t address reality. It’s foolish or disingenuous, and I’m inclined towards the explanation that involves the media thinking we’re idiots. I suppose it could be a case of them thinking “oh please god make it go away!” and hoping this is enough to let it blow over, but somehow I think they’re more cynical than that.
That said, I don’t understand why any group, whether it be Jackson, AARP, NAACP, AIPIC or whoever doesn’t accept that letting fools babble and fighting them with good information is a far better strategy than trying to stifle them. I guess there’s less opportunities for self-promotion that way…
mrmobi
Not a bad trade at all.
Now, if we could just get assholes like Limbaugh and Coulter excised from the public discourse, we might make some more progress toward a society where people, to quote the great man, “are not judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.”
MNPundit
The question is, how can Carville sleep at night with MATALIN.
mrmobi
John, you were right. The good news is, he’s washed up.
I have no problem with loyalty to a friend. In fact, I hope I would behave the same way. But “beyond the pale,” come on, Jimmy Carville’s all grown up. I think your “fauxtrage” is overblown.
What remains beyond the pale is what Imus said, and what I hope he gets fired for. I wish the same for Limbaugh and Coulter and anyone else who aims their invective at innocent individuals.
mrmobi
You know, normally, I would jump right on that, but I have a friend in the same field as I who recently sat next to Mary Matalin on a commercial airliner. He’s an independent, but has a progressive outlook, and he said she was “simply charming.”
They did not talk politics.
scarshapedstar
Similarly, when you see the tip of a turd poking out from the hole in the bottom of the toilet, you have no idea how long that sucker really is.
Richard Bottoms
Like I give a shit.
Imus needs to take his millions and go home. He’s done.
mrmobi
Scar, thanks for that lovely visual!
Fledermaus
I think most of this get this. It’s not some vast conspiracy but just them standing by their friend. Which reminds me of a certain They Might Be Giants song:
Rome Again
Thanks for playing, please try again!
MBunge
JC said – “The larger social point – that a “clubbiness” has formed, that is based on mutually advantageous backscratching, isn’t made less true though, by the matter of loyalty.
It’s actually interesting how a characteristic which is, and should be, admired – loyalty, and standing by your friends – is actually mutually reinforced by a media/political system, that goes along to get along, in this case, the Beltway syndrome.”
But what Carville defined as loyalty isn’t the loyalty of a man. It’s the loyalty of a dog or some lesser animal. I know it sounds weirdly archaic to put it this way, but it is barbarians who are defined by personal loyalty. Carville defended Clinton because Clinton stuck a cigar into someone Carville didn’t know or care about. If Clinton had stuck it into Carville’s neice, loyalty wouldn’t have even entered the discussion.
Civilized people put their first loyalty into what is true, right and good. It is almost the definition of civilized to be willing to call your best friend to account for his bad behavior to a stranger.
Mike
Rome Again
While I agree, I think you’ll have trouble finding consensus on that point.
Pb
First, Blitzer v. Sharpton on this:
I think Sharpton has a good point here–and then, check out this garbage response:
CNN: please fire Blitzer next. Oh, right, that’s what you pay him for. “What about all the good news we don’t hear about?” I bet Imus was out there painting those schools in Iraq too, well, that makes everything better.
p.lukasiak
Re: Carville defending Imus because he’s been a “friend” since 1992.
I guess the question is how you define “friend”.
Among politicians, almost everyone describes everyone else as their “friend”. In the overwhelming majority of cases, that translates in the real world to “acquaintance that I interact with on occassion thanks to work, and may see at large social gatherings.” Its someone with whom one is “friendly”.
The friendship between Clinton and Carville was doubtless a real friendship, based on their long-term working relationship — and loyalty based on that friendship is appropriate.
But AFAIK (and given the fact that Imus is located in New York, and Carville has been based in DC for the last 15 years–not to mention the fact that Imus can’t have much of a social life given the kind of hours his job requires him to keep) there is absolutely no evidence of any real “friendship”. Was Imus invited to the Carville-Matalin wedding? How often have they had dinner at each others home? Lacking any evidence of the kind of “friendship” that demands loyalty, isn’t it safer to assume that what we are talking about is really just a mutually beneficial professional relationship?
It appears to me that this isn’t really about Don Imus — its more about the fact that Cole himself has some pretty unsavory friends (including a number of wingnut bloggers) whom he feels compelled to defend — and that his defense of “Imus’s friends” is really a means of justifying his own (otherwise inexcusable) behavior.
Rome Again
I’m not! :)
MattM
John,
The extent of friend loyalty in a situation like this, though, extends only as far as “don’t go on TV and trash the guy.” Which is fine…I don’t expect every single person who knows Imus to publicly disassociate themselves if they don’t want to.
However, friend loyalty doesn’t require one to go on TV to defend him in what’s essentially a situation in which he has no defense.
empty
This from Gwen Ifill (who I do not like but when she is right …)
DougJ
The Imus controversy bores me…now is time on Sprockets ven ve dance!
Pooh
I agree, Dieter.
Don Imus, Still and Asshole, film at 11.
At risk of minimizing and what not, I feel that there is a categorical difference between “nappy headed hoes” and say, the Insta-approved “more rubble, less trouble, because they aren’t ready for civilization.” If the former is directed your way, you can basically just say “Fuck you, you wizened old tuna-boat.” The second, might just involve air raid sirens.
HyperIon
i like this sentiment.
this whole topic puts me in mind of what i regard as a logic flaw in the golden rule. often in friendships there is a sense of “you take care of me and i’ll take care of you.” an important caveat is missing “…as long as taking care of you meshes with my moral principles”. which gets into loving (i.e., caring/being loyal) unconditionally. and i just don’t get that. (FYI i am not a parent.)
i don’t understand “my country right or wrong” or “my friend right or wrong” or “my family right or wrong”. i end up choosing friends based on shared moral values. like the “They Must Be Giants” lyric implied.
you want loyalty, get a dog.
Ben
Why the fuck does anyone care about Don Anus? First, why would anyone expect anything other than to get fired for saying “nappy headed hoes” on the air? Anus is rich so it isn’t like his family is going to starve if he gets fired. Screw him. If he had any decency he would resign and go actually do something at his tax dodge, ahem, ranch.
Richard 23
Where’s the outrage about these quotes?
Certainly worse than Imus’ joke.
Dug Jay
The characteriztion of this whole Imus brouhaha as “fauxtrage” is dead on. It has simply provided another forum for the race-baiters like the Reverand Al to spew forth their mock disgust. Al’s past actions have made the very worst thing Imus ever said pale into utter nothingness. One only needs to remember the Koreans shop workers in Manhattan burned to death in the storm created by the fiery words of Al.
p.lukasiak
well, then, lets make sure that CBS and MSNBC stop providing each of those politicians with 15 hours of air time each week to disseminate their views without editorial intervention!
Oh, wait… none of these people have their own shows on mainstream media outlets? Well then, I guess the whole series of quotes is simply an attempt to change the subject, isn’t it?
The Kid
I have two problems with this Imus stuff. First of all, he’s been doing this silly shit for years. Why the big stink now? Secondly, there are plenty of radio hosts who say a lot worse things on a daily basis. They induce fear and paranoia, they advocate violence against anyone who disagrees with them and they spread lies and smears and misinformation with the clear intent of throwing dust in everyone’s eyes so that their corporate masters can continue the grand theft of the American soul. But these people are feted on news shows and treated as experts on everything from immigration to global warming when, in reality, all they know is how to make big bucks spreading hate and divisiveness. Not to demean the justifiable anger felt by African Americans by this ignorant fossil of a shock jock, it is peanuts compared to what these “respectable” evil doers are fomenting.
The Kid
FYI
Not everyone on the left has been calling for an Imus lynching. Randi Rhodes and Ed Schultz have been telling their audiences what we always say to the viscious right when they get their censoring panties in a twist – if you don’t like what he says, don’t listen. Period.
Chad N. Freude
Voltaire has been consistently mistranslated. What he actually said was “I disagree with what you say, so shut the fuck up.” It sounds better in the original French.
jake
I seem to recall talking a fair amount of smack about the people who supported Annethony Coulter after her “faggot” comment. I’m not sure if that qualifies as fauxtrage but I know I don’t care.
Here’s how it works:
Let’s say that instead of a friend who is a tedious arse with a radio show, or a vituperative bitch/sweet heart of the fRight Wing, you have a friend who is an alcoholic. Let’s further posit that instead of a fucked up comment on broadcast radio or at a meeting, you take your friend to a party and he makes fucked up comments to the hosts.
You can of course defend your pal’s behaviour and some people might even say “Gee, isn’t that loyal,” but see what happens if you keep bringing the drunk to social events.
Not fair? Who cares? If you want to stand by a man who stirs up shit, prepare to get a little dirty.
Chad N. Freude
This one is really dumb. First, I haven’t heard of anyone calling for jailing for hate speech. Second, the idea of a hate crime is to increase the sentence for a prosecutable crime. You can argue with the wisdom of that, but again I know of no one who has called for criminalizing non-criminal acts because they were motivated by animosity towards some group. Third, I don’t recall the left demanding — and getting — penalties levied for the momentary flashing of Janet Jackson’s breast and new rules to cow the networks into self-censorship. Fourth, well maybe not actually dumb, but certainly giving far too much credit to college students as representative of the “left”, a term which, by the way, seems not to be well-defined here. Fifth, speaking of the “fascist left”, please list all the differences between the beliefs and actions of the Bush administration and a fascist regime, and then, for extra credit, explain why they can’t be characterized as the “fascist right”.
“The left hates freedom”. Unlike the right that supports holding people in prison and tortures them, without charging them with a crime. Unlike the right presidential secretary who reminded us that we had to be careful about what we say. Unlike the right that puts Democratic senators and college lecturers on watch lists. Unlike the right that supports government eavesdropping in contravention of the law. Yeah, the left hates all that freedom stuff.
James Cape
If a “friend” of mine makes some racist comment on TV, I’d split the difference and go with not saying anything to anyone but my friend; loyalty means keeping your bitch sessions with your friends private, not defending your friends publicly.
But that’s at least one example of how actual human beings deal with problems, and this story is about the denizens of the corporate-controlled funhouse otherwise known as The Beltway(tm). It’s just the sort of escapist entertainment for the repressed drama-junkie in all of us, because it presents itself as for “informative purposes only.”
Oh, did you hear the latest gossip about how Wolfowitz got his mistress a job at the IBRD? It was all over Bloomberg today! *munches on cookie-dough ice cream*
Pb
but… but… I’ve been speeding on these roads for years, officer, and you never caught me at it before–and what about the guy in front of me, he was going way faster!
Chad N. Freude
Clinton?
ConservativelyLiberal
I watch Imus and I have listened to him for many years now. He is who he is, and that is that. But he is not a racist, and anyone who says so has never watched his show. He is a non stop philoanthropist for many causes, giving of his time, money and celebrity status to raise money for diverse causes. He cares about people, and he would not invest so much of his time and money in projects like this if he was a racist or hateful person.
Did Imus fuck up? Yes he did, and he did so royally. But what he said has been taken so far out of context that it does not resemble the original. Bernard (his producer) and Don were talking about how the Rutgers women trounced the opposition and won, and they what they were saying is that these were ‘tough’ women, to essentially get out of their way as they are there to win, not lose. Watch the segment, or read the transcript. What was said was about the worst way to say what they meant, but I myself have chosen my words poorly once or twice in my life (actually, more often than that). Have you ever said something that you later regretted? If you are human, you have.
Like the old line goes, let ye who is without sin cast the first stone. When people like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson step in to the mess, you know that something is up. I can’t remember who, but not too long ago someone of some fame made some slur that upset the black community in America. Jesse dived in and squeezed the person for cash for his Rainbow Coalition. The problem went away. I would not be surprised to find out that Jesse sees Don Imus as a huge cash register. And it is beyond stupid to hear Jesse talk about racist remarks, he of “Hymietown” infamy.
How about Al Sharpton and the Tawana Brawley incident that was proven a hoax, yet to this day Al refuses to apologize to the police officers he maligned. He was sued over it and had to pay out too, but he still insists that he was right. Al and Jesse are not worth even listening to.
What Don said was thoughtless and hurtful, and I hate to imagine what those women felt when they heard what he had said. I will also bet that not a single one of them ‘know’ Don and his show, or how it operates. Don has every right to go after public figures as they can take it or get out of the kitchen if it is too hot for them. But these women at Rutgers did not have this coming to them as they have no way to respond to comments like that. Nor should they ever have to in the first place.
What is going on is between Imus, MSNBC and the women at Rutgers. Everyone else should bow out until the women at Rutgers have spoken for themselves. It is they who matter, not the calls for boycott of his show and advertisers by those who were not involved in what was said, or have never even heard of Don or his show. Butt out and let them hash it out. If the women at Rutgers call for his firing, so be it. They have the right to, and everyone else just needs to shut up and repect that, IMO. If the women forgive him the comments, I bet they will not be respected. I expect the faux outrage will continue but eventually die down once the opportunists have milked it for all they can.
If Don is canned, there will be a ripple of repercussions from the stone being tossed in the pond, and the ripples will affect many people who have benefited over the years by his philanthropy and good works. Don has stood up for parents of autistic children and railed against Thermiosol in childrens injections (suspected of causing autism), he has given children dying of cancer a chance to forget their problems and come to his ranch to learn how to ride and care for horses and get away from their problems for a week. Many parents of these children have thanked Don profusely for the one bright memory in the last days of their child’s life.
Don is no racist. He is stupid though, and he engages his mouth before his brain at times. But what was said was not said in malice or hate. It was a comment on how tough the women of Rutgers were, a comment with some of the most poorly chosen words I have ever heard.
Have any of you ever screwed up? Or are you all perfect? I do not agree with most of Imus’s positions on things, but I do like his show. He supported Harold Ford and he took a lot of heat over it, but his support did not waver. When hurricane Katrina devestated New Orleans, Don was one of the first to say that the lack of reponse by the Bush administration was plainly racist. That it was ‘too dark’ in New Orleans, and that is why they were neglected. He railed on and on about that for some time.
When someone screws up, some people like to focus on that and not the big picture. Well, in my opinion, small minds are not capable of seeing the big picture. Far too many people open their mouth before finding out what they are responding to. In doing so, they only cause more problems and make a bigger mess.
Rant over…