The end of Imus?? Lets hope. [Archive] - MediaLine's Open Line Forum

Clever Login Name

Apr 6th 2007, 10:52 AM

Let's play a game:

Limbaugh Creates Firestorm With Rutgers Comments

NEW YORK -- Rush Limbaugh is creating controversy again.

On "The Rush Limbaugh Show" Thursday, he referred to the Rutgers women's basketball team as "nappy-headed hos."

He was talking to Sid Rosenberg with Sports Talk on the phone about the Women's NCAA Championship game.

Limbaugh started out talking about the Rutgers team as, "some rough girls from Rutgers. They got tattoos," and then went on to call them "some nappy-headed hos."

He compared them to the Tennessee team, saying "The girls from Tennessee -- they all looked cute."

The conversation then went on to compare the game to "the jigaboos versus the wannabes." Media Matters reported that the show's executive producer, Bernard McGuirk, made that comment.

Limbaugh has more to say about those remarks, according to the New York Times. Rush said people should relax and not worry about "some idiot comment meant to be amusing."
-----------------------------------------------

How quickly do you think this situation would go away?

markminn

Apr 6th 2007, 11:10 AM

Clever Login Name has a point. It would be the lead talking point on the chat shows on FNC, MSNBC, and CNN. Plus, Rosie would have a cow about it. And really, nobody wants to see that cow have a cow.

Chief

Apr 6th 2007, 02:02 PM

He said: "It was completely inappropriate, and we can understand why people were offended. Our characterization was thoughtless and stupid, and we are sorry."

That's about as unequivical as it gets.

Good for him.

It was stupid. It was thoughtless.

More people should apologize like this.... like that woman who made the retard comment.

Bandit '07

Apr 6th 2007, 02:32 PM

The Imus apology was good and needed, as Chief said. The comments were ugly and totally out of line. I'm glad I didn't hear them personally.

Imus has done a lot of good things in his life for a lot of people. Say what you will about his show, but it's clear that he's made the most of the second chance that he's been given in his sober years.

Great point CLN ... has Rush ever apologized for making insensitive comments over the years? I'm not asking to be a smart-ass - I don't listen to him at all and really don't know.

What the ?

Apr 6th 2007, 02:35 PM

Originally posted by jama:
It was definitely wrong for Imus to say it. But if Chris Rock said it, it would be funny. Kramer would be wrong to say it too. Chapelle...funny.This is what's so wrong with the situation. If it's "wrong" for one person to say it, shouldn't it be "wrong" for anyone to say it? That in itself is a form of racism.

Funny, I thought Dr. King wanted us to look past the color of our skin...but it seems all anyone wants to do is use skin color to their advantage. The next time Chris Rock says something derogatory about white people I want to the National Association of White Journalists to complain....oh, wait a minute...if it's an "all-white" organization it's "racist" and that's bad...but it's ok to have an "all-black" association like the National Association of Black Journalists. Or the NAACP. Or BET. Or a historically-black college. When's the last time you heard someone refer to a "historically-white" college?

This isn't just a black-white thing. This is also includes hispanics, asians, indians and every other ethnic group. Why can't we all just be people? The longer we hold on to our "sub-groups" the longer racism will stay around...on all sides.

Rant over.

And by the way, Imus isn't going anywhere. He just re-upped with WFAN-AM for 5 years. After that, he'll retire.

[ April 06, 2007, 03:39 PM: Message edited by: What the ? ]

Clever Login Name

Apr 9th 2007, 10:07 AM

Originally posted by Bandit '07:
The Imus apology was good and needed, as Chief said. The comments were ugly and totally out of line. I'm glad I didn't hear them personally.

Imus has done a lot of good things in his life for a lot of people. Say what you will about his show, but it's clear that he's made the most of the second chance that he's been given in his sober years.

Great point CLN ... has Rush ever apologized for making insensitive comments over the years? I'm not asking to be a smart-ass - I don't listen to him at all and really don't know.Don't know, Bandit, I don't listen to him either. About the only thing I can think of from Limbaugh is the Donovan McNabb controversy on MNF ... and he got sacked for that. Imus's remarks are much worse, and I just don't see how "oh, he's apologized, so it's okay" gets him off the hook.

News Is Broken

Apr 9th 2007, 10:33 AM

Oh waah, waah he called them a name. Puhleeze. Then he goes on the news and says it was a joke? No kidding it was a joke! The joke is on all these idiots who got all butt-hurt and offended.

I'm so sick of everyone sugarcoating their words. Why? Call it like you see it and then when the media goes into hyperlocaluproarfragilisticexpealidocia (made up word, stay with me people) just look at the camera and say "Apologize? For what? This is America. I have the right to say what I want. Don't like it? Maybe this isn't the country for you."

I'm not saying that what he said was in particularly good taste but come on, how is this any different than Howard Stern talking about his penis for the entire morning or a numbnut DJ who licks a bugzapper on the air in a ratings stunt? Just something to think about. Carry on...

Signature on File

Apr 9th 2007, 10:51 AM

It just goes to show you that you can't say anything on the radio or television without offending someone, someplace, somehow.

What the ?

Apr 9th 2007, 11:45 AM

I'm so sick of everyone sugarcoating their words. Why? Call it like you see it and then when the media goes into hyperlocaluproarfragilisticexpealidocia (made up word, stay with me people) just look at the camera and say "Apologize? For what? This is America. I have the right to say what I want. Don't like it? Maybe this isn't the country for you."
Amen.

Was it an appropriate thing to say? That's up to you to decide. Does he have the right to say it? Absolutely.

What Sharpton, Jackson, etc. want is the right to censor. That, my friends is UNAMERICAN. That's socialist and communist. Just like Imus has the right to say it, Sharpton, et. al, have the right to boycott, demonstrate, etcetera here in the United States. God Bless the 1st Amendment.

Why did the group protest outside of the Chicago NBC station? Wouldn't it make more sense to protest outside of WFAN-AM in New York? That's Imus' flagship station. Or what about outside the MSNBC studios?

And, by the way, when during this whole affair did Imus say it was the "black players" who he was talking about? There are two white players. How do we know he wasn't talking about them? Just food for thought...

[ April 09, 2007, 12:46 PM: Message edited by: What the ? ]

Diplomat

Apr 9th 2007, 11:53 AM

Sharpton and Jackson have made bigoted remarks that are far worse than anything Imus has said. I think what Imus said was stupid and will not defend what he said.

Anyone who defends or praises Jackson and Sharpton is a fool.

cinehead

Apr 9th 2007, 11:53 AM

It's funny, my wife, who is black and about as un-PC as you can imagine, laughed at his comments, but said that calling a black person nappy haired, is about the worst thing you can say to them. She said although some blacks use the N-word around each other, they would never call each other nappy haired unless they were looking for a fight.

Then, today while watching Imus on Al Sharpton's talk show, she rolls hers eyes and says, "damn, if he wanted to apologize, did he have go on a talk show hosted by a guy that really does have nappy hair?"

[ April 09, 2007, 06:54 PM: Message edited by: cinehead ]

Obewon

Apr 9th 2007, 12:27 PM

The point of this whole is what Clever Log In Name said. This is another example of the complete double standards by the liberal media. All the NBC folks and everybody else are going to circle the wagons around this ass-hat, drug addict just like they do for all liberals who screw up.

The fact is there is one set of rules for conservatives and another for liberals and to make it worse, the coward liberals refuse to admit it

cinehead

Apr 9th 2007, 12:37 PM

Originally posted by Obewon:
The point of this whole is what Clever Log In Name said. This is another example of the complete double standards by the liberal media. All the NBC folks and everybody else are going to circle the wagons around this ass-hat, drug addict just like they do for all liberals who screw up.

The fact is there is one set of rules for conservatives and another for liberals and to make it worse, the coward liberals refuse to admit itGood theory, and I agree with Clever that Rush would have been crucified for saying the same thing. But, explain to me how Imus is liberal.

LENSCRAFTER

Apr 9th 2007, 02:36 PM

NBC News is suspending for two weeks Imus simulcasts on MSNBC

Find out more at http://breakingnews.msnbc.com

Obewon

Apr 9th 2007, 03:25 PM

Originally posted by cinehead:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Obewon:
The point of this whole is what Clever Log In Name said. This is another example of the complete double standards by the liberal media. All the NBC folks and everybody else are going to circle the wagons around this ass-hat, drug addict just like they do for all liberals who screw up.

The fact is there is one set of rules for conservatives and another for liberals and to make it worse, the coward liberals refuse to admit itGood theory, and I agree with Clever that Rush would have been crucified for saying the same thing. But, explain to me how Imus is liberal.[/QUOTE]I don't know what to say except that if you actually listened to him more than one day you would understndb

Marty McFly

Apr 9th 2007, 03:36 PM

Call me crazy... but weren't their heads, indeed nappy?

Geez, call a spade a spade, I say!

Uh oh... that could be twisted around too!

The 'ho's' comment may have been out of line, but who is to blame for that? That term is thrown around so often to describe black women it's almost commonplace to make a comment like that where's it's not meant to offend anyone.

What's really ridiculous is the fact that Al Sharpton has his panties in a twist over this.

Hey Imus! Blacks are off limits! You can go after the Jews all day long!

Apr 9th 2007, 04:15 PM

I'm sorry, do you think because it's a much used slang term it's okay to call them whores?

I am less bothered by the "Nappy-headed" as I am whores.

whores, whores, whores. There, I threw it around in a common manner, does that make it better?

Moderate

Apr 9th 2007, 04:35 PM

Who cares what he said -- he's a radio talk host -- he gets paid to say stupid stuff. It's not a serious suspension --if it were it would've been immediate -- not -- oh lets wait until we can fill the time with something. It's BS -- if listenrs are taht outraged -- vote with your dial. Seems many have been doing that for years with the I man anyway.

cinehead

Apr 9th 2007, 05:49 PM

Originally posted by Obewon:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by cinehead:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Obewon:
The point of this whole is what Clever Log In Name said. This is another example of the complete double standards by the liberal media. All the NBC folks and everybody else are going to circle the wagons around this ass-hat, drug addict just like they do for all liberals who screw up.

The fact is there is one set of rules for conservatives and another for liberals and to make it worse, the coward liberals refuse to admit itGood theory, and I agree with Clever that Rush would have been crucified for saying the same thing. But, explain to me how Imus is liberal.[/QUOTE]I don't know what to say except that if you actually listened to him more than one day you would understndb[/QUOTE]I do listen to him. Been listening to him for about 12 years now. I listened to him support Bob Dole in 1996, John McCain in 2000, George Allen and Rick Santorum this year. Now, I'm not saying Imus is a conservative, but he's no liberal either.

[ April 10, 2007, 05:16 AM: Message edited by: cinehead ]

kim jung il

Apr 9th 2007, 06:42 PM

If not piss someone off? ...
http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2000/korea/story/leader/kim.dae.jung/link.kim.jong.il.jpg
...job left undone.

Inspiration of Anger, Controversy,
open mind for thought and exercise.
Good or Bad? You had to stop and
reflect upon you value, and those of
other.

Productive? Progress? It up to you.

CKMD

Apr 9th 2007, 06:57 PM

How come black people get to call their women "ho's" but if a white man says it, it's racist?

Marty McFly

Apr 10th 2007, 12:44 AM

Originally posted by k2:
I'm sorry, do you think because it's a much used slang term it's okay to call them whores?

I am less bothered by the "Nappy-headed" as I am whores.

whores, whores, whores. There, I threw it around in a common manner, does that make it better?Geez moron, did you skip over the part where I said: The 'ho's' comment may have been out of line... And there is a difference between WHORE and HO, dip$h*t.

Oh Snap

Apr 10th 2007, 02:36 AM

Originally posted by Can't Keep Me Down:
How come black people get to call their women "ho's" but if a white man says it, it's racist?No one "gets" to call anyone a ho. I'm not sure who you've been listening to, but no one calls me a ho, and god help them if they do. In fact, the only time I can recall being called a whore to my face was when a drunk white man did it outside a bar. You're making it sound like it's ok or a right for someone to call a woman a ho, and it's not. Ever. For anyone black or white or whatever else. As a man you should be outraged... and as a women you should be incredibly offended when that sort of language is used. What kind of man calls a group of college girls "hos" anyway? Perhaps if he knew them and paid them for sex he could do that, but I'm pretty sure that's not the case. He's an embarrassment.

Does Imus have a RIGHT to say whatever he wants? To a certain degree. But I would never go on television and call him a "pencil-dicked asswipe." It may or may not be true... And I may have the right to say it... but I would worry that people might question my integrity, character and motives, and I value that more than a quick laugh. Imus is in a powerful position -- he has the ears of a lot of people. During his two weeks off he should come up with better ways to use it.

Marty McFly

Apr 10th 2007, 04:35 AM

You're making it sound like it's ok or a right for someone to call a woman a ho, and it's not. Ever. For anyone black or white or whatever else. So that goes for Chris Rock and most anybody on Def Comedy Jam as well, right?

CKMD

Apr 10th 2007, 06:25 AM

Originally posted by Oh Snap:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Can't Keep Me Down:
How come black people get to call their women "ho's" but if a white man says it, it's racist?No one "gets" to call anyone a ho. [/QUOTE]Oh....so Snoop Dogg and Ice-T and Ice Cube and all of them aren't calling anyone a "ho"? They are just using the term to describe what then? The dog? The cat? The lawn mower.

It's a simple question. Why can black men and women use self-depracating terminology for themselves but if someone who's not black uses it, it's racist?

I am not implying anything. It's a simple question. Can you answer it without assuming too much about my background? Let me give you ahint...I as well, am a minority. But, unlike many minorities, don't capitalize on it.

Please...discuss.

cinehead

Apr 10th 2007, 06:57 AM

Ladies and gentleman this is a reminder that one 'awe sh*t' can wipe out a thousand 'attaboys'.

Kace

Apr 10th 2007, 08:25 AM

It's the Bad Apple Clause, only this time it's used in reference to someone's personality.

Signature on File

Apr 10th 2007, 08:32 AM

Here's my thoughts on Imus!
Merciless. Loathsome. Shambolic. In case you can't tell, I'm making a direct reference to Imus. To begin with, there is a proper place in life for hatred. Hatred of that which is wrong is a powerful and valuable tool. But when Imus perverts hatred in order to exhibit a deep disdain for all people who are not unpleasant con artists, it becomes clear that only through education can individuals gain the independent tools they need to justify condemnation, constructive criticism, and ridicule of him and his brutal, ignorant activities. But the first step is to acknowledge that Imus says that everyone would be a lot safer if he were to monitor all of our personal communications and financial transactions -- even our library records. Why on Earth does Imus need to monitor our library records? I could give you the answer now, but it would be more productive for me first to inform you that if I didn't sincerely believe that Imus's rantings are just another signpost marking our long, steep cultural descent, then I wouldn't be writing this post. Even Imus's confreres couldn't deal with the full impact of Imus's declamations. That's why they created "Imus-ism," which is just a cynical excuse to acquire power and use it to indoctrinate jaundiced carousers. Here's an eye-opener for you: I am concerned that his vague and overly broad definition of "transubstantiatively" will cause the worst kinds of cranky sluggards I've ever seen to befuddle the public and make sin seem like merely a sophisticated fashion one day. If that fact hurts, get over it; it's called reality. And for another dose of reality, consider that if the only way to identify, challenge, defy, disrupt, and, finally, destroy the institutions that twist my words six ways for Sunday is for me to tear off all my clothes and run naked down the street, then so be it. It would undeniably be worth it because the purpose of this post is far greater than to prove to you how sinful and ignominious he has become. The purpose of this post is to get you to start thinking for yourself, to start thinking about how on several occasions I have heard him state that women are crazed Pavlovian sex-dogs who will salivate at any object even remotely phallic in shape. I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a comment. What I consider far more important, though, is that Imus used to complain about being persecuted. Now he is our primary persecutor. This reversal of roles reminds me that Imus takes things out of context, twists them around, and then neglects to provide decent referencing so the reader can check up on him. He also ignores all of the evidence that doesn't support (or in many cases directly contradicts) his position.

I once had a nightmare in which Imus was free to peddle the snake oil of perfidious, treasonous egotism. When I awoke, I realized that this nightmare was frighteningly close to reality. For instance, it is the case both in my nightmare and in reality that Imus has convinced a lot of people that courtesy and manners don't count for anything. One must pause in admiration at this triumph of media manipulation. The tone of his doctrines is so far removed from reality, I find myself questioning what color the sky must be in his world.

Imus is right about one thing, namely that hate is what motivates us. Fear of what it means when snivelling poltroons destroy the values, methods, and goals of traditional humanistic study. Fear of what it says about our society when we teach our children that children should get into cars with strangers who wave lots of yummy candy at them. And fear of larcenous beguilers like Imus who remake the world to suit his own wicked needs. Thus, in summing up, we can establish the following: 1) There are lessons to be learned from history, and 2) by balancing the theoretical untruth and nonsense of Imus's ramblings with the reality of this phenomenon, we can see that some time ago, in the aftermath of his last volley of attacks, a group of corrupt present-day robber barons began to irritate an incredible number of people.

News Is Broken

Apr 10th 2007, 08:33 AM

Originally posted by Marty McFly:
Call me crazy... but weren't their heads, indeed nappy?

Geez, call a spade a spade, I say!

Indeed. That's exactly what he did, and look at what happened.

For reference, here's a picture of some members of the team in question:
http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/j/msnbc/Components/Photos/070406/070406_rutgers_hmed_1p.standard.jpg

We're not talking homecoming queen material here, folks. Ask yourself honestly if, besides the "Ho" comment, what Imus said was that far off the mark. I don't think it was.

But rather than go on, I'll just leave you to draw your own conclusion.

cinehead

Apr 10th 2007, 09:29 AM

Originally posted by Signature on File:
Here's my thoughts on Imus!
Merciless. Loathsome. Shambolic. In case you can't tell, I'm making a direct reference to Imus. To begin with, there is a proper place in life for hatred. Hatred of that which is wrong is a powerful and valuable tool. But when Imus perverts hatred in order to exhibit a deep disdain for all people who are not unpleasant con artists, it becomes clear that only through education can individuals gain the independent tools they need to justify condemnation, constructive criticism, and ridicule of him and his brutal, ignorant activities. But the first step is to acknowledge that Imus says that everyone would be a lot safer if he were to monitor all of our personal communications and financial transactions -- even our library records. Why on Earth does Imus need to monitor our library records? I could give you the answer now, but it would be more productive for me first to inform you that if I didn't sincerely believe that Imus's rantings are just another signpost marking our long, steep cultural descent, then I wouldn't be writing this post. Even Imus's confreres couldn't deal with the full impact of Imus's declamations. That's why they created "Imus-ism," which is just a cynical excuse to acquire power and use it to indoctrinate jaundiced carousers. Here's an eye-opener for you: I am concerned that his vague and overly broad definition of "transubstantiatively" will cause the worst kinds of cranky sluggards I've ever seen to befuddle the public and make sin seem like merely a sophisticated fashion one day. If that fact hurts, get over it; it's called reality. And for another dose of reality, consider that if the only way to identify, challenge, defy, disrupt, and, finally, destroy the institutions that twist my words six ways for Sunday is for me to tear off all my clothes and run naked down the street, then so be it. It would undeniably be worth it because the purpose of this post is far greater than to prove to you how sinful and ignominious he has become. The purpose of this post is to get you to start thinking for yourself, to start thinking about how on several occasions I have heard him state that women are crazed Pavlovian sex-dogs who will salivate at any object even remotely phallic in shape. I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a comment. What I consider far more important, though, is that Imus used to complain about being persecuted. Now he is our primary persecutor. This reversal of roles reminds me that Imus takes things out of context, twists them around, and then neglects to provide decent referencing so the reader can check up on him. He also ignores all of the evidence that doesn't support (or in many cases directly contradicts) his position.

I once had a nightmare in which Imus was free to peddle the snake oil of perfidious, treasonous egotism. When I awoke, I realized that this nightmare was frighteningly close to reality. For instance, it is the case both in my nightmare and in reality that Imus has convinced a lot of people that courtesy and manners don't count for anything. One must pause in admiration at this triumph of media manipulation. The tone of his doctrines is so far removed from reality, I find myself questioning what color the sky must be in his world.

Imus is right about one thing, namely that hate is what motivates us. Fear of what it means when snivelling poltroons destroy the values, methods, and goals of traditional humanistic study. Fear of what it says about our society when we teach our children that children should get into cars with strangers who wave lots of yummy candy at them. And fear of larcenous beguilers like Imus who remake the world to suit his own wicked needs. Thus, in summing up, we can establish the following: 1) There are lessons to be learned from history, and 2) by balancing the theoretical untruth and nonsense of Imus's ramblings with the reality of this phenomenon, we can see that some time ago, in the aftermath of his last volley of attacks, a group of corrupt present-day robber barons began to irritate an incredible number of people.Could someone please translate the above for me? I only understand sanity.

News Is Broken

Apr 10th 2007, 09:32 AM

Originally posted by cinehead:
Could someone please translate the above for me? I only understand sanity.I think it means Jesse Jackson got a login on Medialine. Just a theory though...

Apr 10th 2007, 10:40 AM

Originally posted by Marty McFly:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by k2:
I'm sorry, do you think because it's a much used slang term it's okay to call them whores?

I am less bothered by the "Nappy-headed" as I am whores.

whores, whores, whores. There, I threw it around in a common manner, does that make it better?Geez moron, did you skip over the part where I said: The 'ho's' comment may have been out of line... And there is a difference between WHORE and HO, dip$h*t.[/QUOTE]In a post about name calling, you couldn't help yourself?

And yes, ho means whore. Google it, check the urban dictionary, prostitute, whore, hooker, tramp, slut.

Marty McFly

Apr 10th 2007, 11:28 AM

Thanks for clearing that up k2! You should really chime in more often. Your 'pointing out the obvious' posts really add to Medialine!
:rolleyes:

Signature on File

Apr 10th 2007, 12:39 PM

I am posting to express my concerns about Rev. Al Sharpton and, more specifically, his cajoleries regarding splenetic loonies, such as Imus. Let me cut to the chase: Many people think of Rev. Sharpton's huffy sound bites as a joke, as something only half-serious. In fact, they're deadly serious. They're the tool by which domineering used-car salesmen will lead an active disinformation campaign before long. A second all-too-serious item is that Rev. Sharpton is lacking in the social graces. It's that simple. In order to find the common ground that enables others to enhance people's curiosity, critical acumen, and aesthetic sensitivity, we must encourage individuals to come out of their cocoons and flourish. And that's just the first step. Remember, I overheard one of Rev. Sharpton's thralls say, "Science is merely a tool invented by the current elite to maintain power." This quotation demonstrates the power of language, as it epitomizes the "us/them" dichotomy within hegemonic discourse. As for me, I prefer to use language to stand up and fight for our heritage, traditions, and values. What I find frightening is that some academics actually believe Rev. Sharpton's line that the boogeyman is going to get us if we don't agree to his demands. In this case, "academics" refers to a stratum of the residual intelligentsia surviving the recession of its demotic base, not to those seekers of truth who understand that I oppose Rev. Sharpton's personal attacks because they are jejune. I oppose them because they are poxy. And I oppose them because they will make higher education accessible only to those in the higher echelons of society in the near future. It is imperative that all of us in this community serve on the side of Truth. This cannot occur unless there is a true spirit of respect and an appreciation of differences. Rhetoric aside, in the Old Testament, the Book of Kings relates how the priests of Baal were slain for deceiving the people. I'm not suggesting that there be any contemporary parallel involving Rev. Sharpton, but Rev. Sharpton has never gotten ahead because of his hard work or innovative ideas. Rather, all of Rev. Sharpton's successes are due to kickbacks, bribes, black market double-dealing, outright thuggery, and unsavory political intrigue. The bottom line is that those of us who have had to deal with the victims of Rev. Al Sharpton's writings don't find his press releases at all humorous.

[ April 10, 2007, 01:39 PM: Message edited by: Signature on File ]

Oh Snap

Apr 10th 2007, 01:23 PM

Originally posted by Can't Keep Me Down:

Oh....so Snoop Dogg and Ice-T and Ice Cube and all of them aren't calling anyone a "ho"? They are just using the term to describe what then? The dog? The cat? The lawn mower.

It's a simple question. Why can black men and women use self-depracating terminology for themselves but if someone who's not black uses it, it's racist?

I am not implying anything. It's a simple question. Can you answer it without assuming too much about my background? Let me give you ahint...I as well, am a minority. But, unlike many minorities, don't capitalize on it.

Please...discuss.I will never understand why people point to ignorant thugs as the paragons of what is acceptable in society. A rapper named Tony Yayo recently slapped the 14-year-old son of a man he didn't like. Does that mean we should all go around back-handing teenagers? Just because some whacked-out musician does or says something is not a great excuse to repeat the action. They're not all alike, though. There are plenty of great rappers who don't randomly refer to all women as "hos." They're not nearly as popular as the crazy ones. It might be interesting to figure out why. I'm getting off my point which is: not ALL black people use those terms. And when some do it should not be acceptable.

I didn't think you were implying anything. I'm not sure what your race has to do with anything. If you're white, and you go around calling women hos, please stop. If you're black and you go around calling women hos, seriously, stop. And if you're any other color/race/ethnicity/whatever and you go around calling any woman a ho, just stop. And who capitalizes on being a minority?? I think we're getting into some unrelated issues...

CKMD

Apr 10th 2007, 03:57 PM

I don't use the word ho.
My question, again, goes to the black people, THE MAJORITY OF BLACK PEOPLE who use those words on a daily basis.
Why is it OK for them to use it and us not?

I added the race thing because you brought it up in your post when analysing my original post. All I want is an answer to the question.

Hypocrites cannot have it both ways. Take out the rappers, fine. I would wager a bet that 90% of black people in this country use the word "nigga" and "ho" in their daily vernacular.

Why is that ok?

adam & doctor drew

Apr 10th 2007, 04:42 PM

back to the thread title:
I'm having a hard time believing Imus really cares at this point whether they fire him or not.

he's 60+ years old.
he's got more money than he can ever spend.

and if he wants to work again, he'll have a multi-million dollar offer from satellite radio about 5 minutes after they fire him.

Oh Snap

Apr 10th 2007, 07:26 PM

Originally posted by Can't Keep Me Down:
I don't use the word ho.
My question, again, goes to the black people, THE MAJORITY OF BLACK PEOPLE who use those words on a daily basis.
Why is it OK for them to use it and us not?

I added the race thing because you brought it up in your post when analysing my original post. All I want is an answer to the question.

Hypocrites cannot have it both ways. Take out the rappers, fine. I would wager a bet that 90% of black people in this country use the word "nigga" and "ho" in their daily vernacular.

Why is that ok?Again, my point -- it's not ok. For anyone. And please don't say 90% of us use those words in our daily vernacular. I've never seen any such statistic, but I'd bet my next five pay checks the one you're using is innaccurate. It's false. It's misleading. It's an ignorant statement... you and Imus have a lot in common.

cinehead

Apr 11th 2007, 03:56 AM

Originally posted by Oh Snap:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Can't Keep Me Down:
I don't use the word ho.
My question, again, goes to the black people, THE MAJORITY OF BLACK PEOPLE who use those words on a daily basis.
Why is it OK for them to use it and us not?

I added the race thing because you brought it up in your post when analysing my original post. All I want is an answer to the question.

Hypocrites cannot have it both ways. Take out the rappers, fine. I would wager a bet that 90% of black people in this country use the word "nigga" and "ho" in their daily vernacular.

Why is that ok?Again, my point -- it's not ok. For anyone. And please don't say 90% of us use those words in our daily vernacular. I've never seen any such statistic, but I'd bet my next five pay checks the one you're using is innaccurate. It's false. It's misleading. It's an ignorant statement... you and Imus have a lot in common.[/QUOTE]Can't Keep Me Down, where do you get the idea that "most" blacks use that word? My wife is black, but I've never heard her use the word. She has five brothers; I've never heard them use the word either. Have I heard some blacks use it? Sure, of course. But that is the exception, not the rule. You asked for an explanation to why it's okay for black folks to say it and not others. It's pretty simple really. When black kids, mostly young males use the word, it's used as a term of endearment not a put down. It's a way of taking ownership of a work used to hurt and making it their own. I don't see why that is so hard to understand.

Look, I'm Irish. I grew up in area that was mostly Irish. I've been in bars and at gatherings where we've called each other Micks. Now, I don't think Mick is a strong a term as the N-word. But, it would be quite a different thing if someone from the outside called us a bunch of Micks. It's all about context and intent.

Can't, you're a smart guy. I read what you post and I know you get passionate in defending your position, but surely can see why it's okay for some people to use the word and why it's not for others.

This world is not about black, or white. It's about gray. What's okay for some is not okay for everybody.

Now, about Imus. I've listened to his show for a long time. I don't think he's racist. In fact, I bet has a bigger black audience than one might expect. My wife's father was a huge fan of his show. But, his comments did disappoint me. I'm disappointed because he should know better.

But, his apology is one of the few celebrity apologies that I thought was genuine. I could hear the hurt and embarrassment in his voice. I think some punishment is a good thing. But, I don't think he should lose his job.

Bandit '07

Apr 11th 2007, 04:45 AM

Cinehead, great post, although I take issue with "ho" being a term of endearment. It's a sexist slur that everyone ... but especially African Americans ... should confront and condemn.

Imus should lose his show only if we're willing to censor every rapper who uses the n-word and ho.

I don't think either approach is a good idea.

cinehead

Apr 11th 2007, 06:43 AM

Originally posted by Bandit '07:
Cinehead, great post, although I take issue with "ho" being a term of endearment. It's a sexist slur that everyone ... but especially African Americans ... should confront and condemn.

Imus should lose his show only if we're willing to censor every rapper who uses the n-word and ho.

I don't think either approach is a good idea.Thanks, Bandit. I agree with you, "ho" is offensive. Typically, it's used by males, both black and white to insult females. Again, it's an example of someone outside a group, trying to put down a particular group.

Signature on File

Apr 11th 2007, 09:39 AM

cinehead, obviously you've never used public transit! The language (from kids) would make a sailor blush.

"Can't Keep Me Down, where do you get the idea that "most" blacks use that word? My wife is black, but I've never heard her use the word. She has five brothers; I've never heard them use the word either. Have I heard some blacks use it? Sure, of course. But that is the exception, not the rule. You asked for an explanation to why it's okay for black folks to say it and not others. It's pretty simple really. When black kids, mostly young males use the word, it's used as a term of endearment not a put down."

[ April 11, 2007, 12:23 PM: Message edited by: Signature on File ]

Signature on File

Apr 11th 2007, 09:44 AM

Breaking News!!!!!!!!!
4/11/2007.....Elftown, NorthPole.
Santa Claus has been suspended for one Christmas after his elves became upset he continued to say, "Ho Ho Ho". One elf also reported to the Sanctuary for the Council of Christmas that Santa had mentioned that he was going to take a "nap". All the elves walked out when someone asked Santa where he had been and he replied, "Napping, HO HO HO!"

cinehead

Apr 11th 2007, 10:51 AM

Originally posted by Signature on File:
cinehead, obviously you've never used public transit! The language would make a sailor blush.Um, what?

Edited to add: Signature on File, what have you been smoking lately? You're losing your already loose grip on reality.

[ April 11, 2007, 12:46 PM: Message edited by: cinehead ]

newschannel fan

Apr 11th 2007, 02:20 PM

breaking news... Nightly uses the top of its' newscast to announce that Imus' show simulcast has been permanently yanked off the air.

CKMD

Apr 11th 2007, 02:56 PM

Originally posted by Oh Snap:
[QUOTE]I've never seen any such statistic, but I'd bet my next five pay checks the one you're using is innaccurate. It's false. It's misleading. It's an ignorant statement... you and Imus have a lot in common.Too bad you have now stereotyped me, hypocrite. You can't even have a civil discussion...pity. It somewhat proves my point! Thanks!
Oh...and it's not a misleading stat. And I'm not ignorant. Thanks for playing. Bye-Bye.

PS: You do the research to prove I am wrong. If you're a journalist, it won't take you very long to see how stats can be manipulated any way we want them to.

[ April 11, 2007, 04:04 PM: Message edited by: Can't Keep Me Down ]

CKMD

Apr 11th 2007, 03:02 PM

Originally posted by cinehead:
[QUOTE]Can't, you're a smart guy. I read what you post and I know you get passionate in defending your position, but surely can see why it's okay for some people to use the word and why it's not for others.I don't think it's ok. That's the point I was trying to make before Oh Snap had to come in here and get all in my face waving her finger, shaking her head.

See my point?

There's a story on CNN webpage right now where a group of black women got together and said using the word "ho" is ok for them because it's their vernacular...but white people can't use it because they aren't black.

Excuse me? And you want there to be fair treatment of the races? You want racial equality?

Well, you can't have it both ways. Either get rid of the vernacular terms that degrade your people or allow us all to use them to whomever and whenever we want.

I find the terms offensive...but, when I hear A MAJORITY OF BLACK PEOPLE USE THEM TO REFER TO THEIR OWN PEOPLE, I figure, "well, it must be ok."
:rolleyes:

Thanks for your nice comments about my usual rants. I am passionate about this because, as a MINORITY, I don't like using words that degrade my people and I don't like when it people in my culture use it to describe themselves or others in it.

[ April 11, 2007, 04:09 PM: Message edited by: Can't Keep Me Down ]

CKMD

Apr 11th 2007, 03:08 PM

Originally posted by Oh Snap:
[QUOTE]I will never understand why people point to ignorant thugs as the paragons of what is acceptable in society. A rapper named Tony Yayo recently slapped the 14-year-old son of a man he didn't like. Does that mean we should all go around back-handing teenagers? Just because some whacked-out musician does or says something is not a great excuse to repeat the action. Because these are the role models of yor youngsters. Face it. If you say they are not, you are blind nd unwilling to except the truth. Rappers are the gods of your culture. Athletes are the gods of your culture. When A MAJORITY of them use derogatory words to talk about themselves and their people, the youngsters think it's ok.
Don't be blind about your own culture!!! It's sad.

what the ??

Apr 11th 2007, 03:17 PM

Originally posted by newschannel fan:
breaking news... Nightly uses the top of its' newscast to announce that Imus' show simulcast has been permanently yanked off the air.Moments later on the show, Al Sharpton apologized for calling members of the Duke Lacrosse team racist and rapist. In a statement he released, Al admitted he was quick to jump to conclusions before evidence was released....ha ha ha ha. That will NEVER happen. Where is the manditory apology?

Bullsh*t

SEPhotog

Apr 11th 2007, 04:27 PM

Can Olberman keep MSNBC's head above water by himself? MSNBC may have just cut off it's nose to spite it's face.

Produce man

Apr 11th 2007, 05:06 PM

Originally posted by SEPhotog:
Can Olberman keep MSNBC's head above water by himself?How hard could it be with one viewer? tongue.gif

Diggin' Bear

Apr 11th 2007, 07:27 PM

Originally posted by Can't Keep Me Down:
[QUOTE]
There's a story on CNN webpage right now where a group of black women got together and said using the word "ho" is ok for them because it's their vernacular...but white people can't use it because they aren't black.

Excuse me? And you want there to be fair treatment of the races? You want racial equality?

Well, you can't have it both ways. Either get rid of the vernacular terms that degrade your people or allow us all to use them to whomever and whenever we want.Great, great post, Can't. This is the kind of intellectual honesty we don't usually see from the minority community. This kind of thinking if so far advanced of the traditional 'victim' mentality that seems to have proliferated in the post Civil rights era in America. The mere fact you go against the grain proves to me that you're probably a damned fine journalist.

Ed Bradley was that kind of guy. He just won another Peabody for questioning the prosecution of the Duke lacrosse players well before anybody else did. That went against the grain of most minority thinking too.

But I do wonder about something: why hasn't anyone raised the ULTIMATE double standard here?

Back in the mid-80's when Jesse Jackson decided to run for president, he referred to New York City as 'Hymietown' while denigrating the Jewish population.

He apologized and of course, everyone accepted - and he continued his fine :rolleyes: career of public service.

So...let's check the scorecard. A guy who claims to be a Right Reverend and moral compass for black america issues a slur toward and entire racial and religious subset and essentially gets a pass.

Fast foward 20 years, and a radio shock jock issues a slur toward a another racial subset using the same street language many others use and loses his job. Nobody wants to accept his apology.

Now, I'm not defending Imus' comment - it was pretty damned dumb.

But isn't there a huuuuuge double standard at work here that nobody seems to want to address?

tater

Apr 12th 2007, 04:03 AM

Originally posted by Diggin' Bear:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Can't Keep Me Down:

There's a story on CNN webpage right now where a group of black women got together and said using the word "ho" is ok for them because it's their vernacular...but white people can't use it because they aren't black.

Excuse me? And you want there to be fair treatment of the races? You want racial equality?

Well, you can't have it both ways. Either get rid of the vernacular terms that degrade your people or allow us all to use them to whomever and whenever we want.Great, great post, Can't. This is the kind of intellectual honesty we don't usually see from the minority community. This kind of thinking if so far advanced of the traditional 'victim' mentality that seems to have proliferated in the post Civil rights era in America. The mere fact you go against the grain proves to me that you're probably a damned fine journalist.

Ed Bradley was that kind of guy. He just won another Peabody for questioning the prosecution of the Duke lacrosse players well before anybody else did. That went against the grain of most minority thinking too.

But I do wonder about something: why hasn't anyone raised the ULTIMATE double standard here?

Back in the mid-80's when Jesse Jackson decided to run for president, he referred to New York City as 'Hymietown' while denigrating the Jewish population.

He apologized and of course, everyone accepted - and he continued his fine :rolleyes: career of public service.

So...let's check the scorecard. A guy who claims to be a Right Reverend and moral compass for black america issues a slur toward and entire racial and religious subset and essentially gets a pass.

Fast foward 20 years, and a radio shock jock issues a slur toward a another racial subset using the same street language many others use and loses his job. Nobody wants to accept his apology.

Now, I'm not defending Imus' comment - it was pretty damned dumb.

But isn't there a huuuuuge double standard at work here that nobody seems to want to address?You want a bigger issue to deal with than double standards...we have the dialogue started, but how do we get rid of racism and sexism? I don't know how this question will be answered and it's a big fish to fry. I think it starts with taking a good look at ourselves and as a society realizing most of us are racists or sexists in some way shape or form in our actions or thoughts. Then forming plans or solutions to try and tackle how people think about other people. Why do you think this way? Why do you believe what you believe?

[ April 12, 2007, 05:04 AM: Message edited by: tater ]