Don Imus and the women's basketball team - Page 2

What the hell are you even talking about? I said what he used as an excuse on Al Sharpton radio show. When Al asked him about blacks, if he was a racist, that was his comeback - he used it as his excuse.

Of course it woud be illegal. The poster asked if he used something like "I have black friends" as an excuse. The answer was yes. I am just typing what his excuse was to Al Sharpton.

From the transcript of his monday show:

So, yeah, he definitely played the "I have black friends" card in record time. Oh, and Brian, what does Whoopi (yes, I am aware she is black )Goldberg have to do with Imus pulling out this tired old excuse?

How many Jon Benet Ramsey jokes have been made? How many Corky jokes have been made?

I think we all agree that it fell flat. It's not hate, it's a piss poor attempt at humor.

No, MSNBC and others have made him more than that. People have made him more than that. His past indesrections have been look past because people running for office and such wanted to use his platform to reach a certain audience. At some point, people started taking him more seriously - but he never changed.

Why is he on MSNBC? That's a question for them - they decided to put an old school shock jock on the air.

And yes, as I said above, go ahead an suspend him. He said something bad, and now he's being punished for it. But let's not use him as the posterboy for rasicm. The fact that Al Sharpton is calling for his firing (someone who has said a few negative things in his time) is total crap. He was "forgiven" for his comments - but not Imus?

Feel free to make a Jon Benet Ramsey joke, and I will feel free to find it is bad taste, at best.

Corky is a little different, as that's a piece of pop culture, and not a real person. If you prefaced the joke with 'that retard who plays Corky', then you may be a douche.

I think the reason Imus is on MSNBC is because he pulls a lot of political heavy hitters. Which is one of the reasons this story has gained traction. So do you argue that it isn't hate if you don't mean it as hate? (oh God painful video games as art flashbacks). Can it be incidental hate? Maybe Michael Richards was just trying to be funny . . . I don't think that takes away from what he said. I find a lot of racial humor to be genuinely funny; I think a lot of Mencia's act is bigoted, unfunny, and hateful. Even if he's 'just' trying to be funny, I don't think that negates the effect.

I can't comment on Sharpton because I can't find what he has said in the past. I've heard this line before, but not from anyone I would take seriously. Sharpton pops off at the mouth plenty though, so I wouldn't dismiss it. I'd need to see the actual quotes before saying else though.

When the Ted Danson in blackface at the Friars Club roast backfired and people started calling Ted racist - Whoopi's comeback was that he was dating a black woman - how could he be racist? He has a ton of black friends, how could he be racist? It was a joke, sorry the audience didn't get it, but I am black and I stick up for him - so it isn't racist. She has statement after statement about in a comedic environment, it's almost impossible to be at fault because you are using humor - it's the role of the audience to be offended or not.

In this case the audience was offended. Now Imus is paying for it. I think that's fair. I just think people are going overboard in their remarks.

The media is blowing something out of proportion? Egads!!

Seriously, there might be some good coming out of this because Imus did get suspended, he's having to meet representatives from the University . . . maybe this tempest in a teapot will make Imus realize that sometimes his comments go too far. I don't think he would have been suspended in the first place if his employers weren't pressured into it.

I know. After reading one of my post, it does come off as giant.. "No shit"!

Just fire this old bigot already. He'll be sitting in the announcer booth at the local rodeo show within a week, and those cowchips never met a racial slur they didn't like.

Well, I'm not going to argue that it wasn't a stupid idea for Danson to parade around in blackface, but it was a Friars Club roast. The whole point is to be as offensive as possible. Danson just went too far and both he and Whoopi should have had sense enough to know that. But, it's a little different than a prejudiced old codger(which there seems to be quite a bit of evidence that, that is exactly what Imus is) letting some of that "just below the surface" racism slip out on the air on MSNBC. Even if it was in the context of a joke. I think it's the difference between extremely bad taste mixed with poor judgement and, in Imus' case, an actual prejudice that slips out when he's running his mouth off.

boo fucking hoo.

Don Imus? I thought he was dead.

He is, but no one told him yet.

I think it is funny that people think Devin is flying the flag of civil rights in this thread when he has not actually voiced his personal opinion of the issue being discussed at all. He simply addressed the issue of white nerds not being able to see how a particular statement could be considered racist. As for Imus, he did admit on The Larry King Show to calling a black female employee a nigger. He blamed being high on cocaine for this racial outburst.

Slate article:

The Wit and Wisdom of Don ImusA guide for Washington's power crowd.

By Timothy Noah
Posted Tuesday, April 10, 2007, at 6:59 PM ET
Don Imus' long-standing acceptance by the political establishment is a contemporary illustration of 1940s socialite Perle Mesta's famous advice about how to draw Washington's power set to a soiree: "Hang a lamb chop in the window." Politicians like John McCain and Barack Obama, and famous TV journalists like Tim Russert and Cokie Roberts, are no more standoffish than their predecessors; the only difference is that the lamb chop has been replaced by a microphone. For some years now, the broadcast industry has conducted, via talk radio and reality TV, a series of experiments to gauge precisely how much personal humiliation the species Homo sapiens will consent to endure. The most surprising finding is that even people with constant access to the media will make themselves available to interviewer-comedians like Sacha Baron "Ali G." Cohen or Steven Colbert—performers whose sole aim is to get laughs at these celebrities' expense. If there's an outer boundary to what a famous journalist or politician will put up with, science has yet to find it.

In the direct-humiliation department, Imus falls well short of Colbert or Ali G. Imus in the Morning is a variation on the experiment, wherein the belittling is indirect. Here, the research question is how long respectable journalists and politicians will associate themselves with a radio host who spews continual invective based on race, ethnicity, and religion. Without exception, every political and journalistic celebrity who appears on Imus' show is diminished. Yet they keep coming back. Is it because they don't know what Imus says when they aren't around? That's what they tend to claim. "I don't listen to the show," McCain told journalist Philip Nobile in June 2000. In an April 9 appearance, Tom Oliphant told Imus, "Solidarity forever," but later covered his ass by saying, "I don't know beans about hip-hop culture or trash-talking or, what do you call those things where you run on forever? Riffs." One person who can't claim ignorance about Imus is Evan Thomas, who on April 9 told the New York Times' David Carr that it would be "posturing" for him to refuse to go on Imus' show after Imus got dinged for calling the Rutgers women's basketball team "nappy-headed hos." Thomas puffed Imus in a 1999 Newsweek cover profile ("The Ringmaster"). "With his quick takes and sense of the absurd," he wrote, "Imus is the perfect voice for an age that prizes irony over solemnity." The Newsweek piece made only glancing reference to Imus' penchant for uttering racial and ethnic slurs on the air, overlooking, for instance, the shock jock's admission the previous year on CBS News' 60 Minutes that he'd once told a colleague he hired producer Bernard McGuirk to tell "nigger" jokes. ("That was an off-the-record conversation," Imus protested to Mike Wallace.)
I
n the unlikely event that McCain, Oliphant, and others don't know who they're dealing with, let's review some of Imus' remarks (if you prefer, riffs) from the past. This stuff isn't hard to find. Many thanks to the Web sites Media Matters for America, Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting, and TomPaine.com (where Nobile tracked Imus' show) for the quotes that appear below.

continued...


On blacks:

"

William Cohen, the Mandingo deal." (Former Defense Secretary Cohen's wife is African-American.)

"Wasn't in a woodpile, was he?" (Responding to news that former black militant H. Rap Brown, subsequently known as Abdullah Al-Amin, was found hiding in a shed in Alabama after exchanging gunfire with police. Imus is here alluding to the expression "nigger in the woodpile.")

"Knuckle-dragging moron." (Description of basketball player Patrick Ewing.)

"We all have 12-inch penises." (After being asked what he has in common with Nat Turner, Malcolm X, Minister Louis Farrakhan, Latrell Sprewell from the New York Knicks, and Al Sharpton.)

"Chest-thumping pimps." (Description of the New York Knicks.)

"A cleaning lady." (Reference to journalist Gwen Ifill, possibly out of pique that she wouldn't appear on his show. "I
certainly don't know any black journalists who will," she wrote in the April 10 New York Times. The Chicago Tribune's Clarence Page used to appear, but after he made Imus pledge not to make offensive comments in the future, he was never asked back.)

On Jews:

"I remember when I first had [the Blind Boys of Alabama] on a few years ago, how the Jewish management at whatever, whoever we work for, CBS, or whatever it is, were bitching at me about it. […] I tried to put it in terms that these

money-grubbing bastards could understand."
"Boner-nosed … beanie-wearing Jewboy." (Description of Howard Kurtz of the Washington Post, a frequent guest.)

On women:

"That

buck-tooth witch Satan, Hillary Clinton." […] "I never admitted it when I went down there and got in all that big jam, insulting Bill Clinton and his fat ugly wife, Satan. Did I? Did I ever say I was sorry for that?"

On Native Americans:

"The

guy from F-Troop, Sen. Ben Nighthorse Campbell." (This is a reference to the zany Indian characters on the 1960s TV sitcom F-Troop. They had names like "Roaring Chicken," "Crazy Cat," and "Chief Wild Eagle.")

On Japanese:

"

Old Kabuki's in a coma and the market's going up. […] How old is the boy? The battery's running down on that boy." (Reference to Japanese Prime Minister Keizo Obuchi, who died the following week.)

On gays:

"I didn't know that Allan Bloom was

coming in from the back end." (The homosexuality of the author of The Closing of the American Mind became widely known when Saul Bellow published Ravelstein, a novel whose protagonist was based on Bloom, who by then was deceased.)
"The enormously attractive [NBC political correspondent] Chip Reid, I can say without being accused of being some limp-wristed 'mo."

On the handicapped:

"Janet Reno's having a press conference. Ms. Reno, of course, has Parkinson's disease, has a noticeable tremor. […] I don't know how she gets that lipstick on (laughter)

looking like a rodeo clown."

Every one of these statements came directly out of Imus' mouth on his program. That's striking because Imus usually leaves it to other show regulars (especially McGuirk, the aforementioned point man on "nigger" jokes) to say the most offensive stuff, with Imus feeding them straight lines. It's safer that way.

http://www.slate.com/id/2163872?nav=ais

Now advertisers are pulling out.

I think you could make a list from Stern that would be three times as long as the above one. Which means Stern is totally next.

Stern's on Sirius so he can say whatever he wants. That's why he left in the first place.

The FCC isn't the one firing Imus, but yeah.

But how's that work, now that you mention it? What was behind past instances of pay services folding to calls of self-censorship (e.g., Showtime, "The Reagans")?

With "The Reagans" it was a situation of Viacom slating it for CBS but then moving it to Showtime instead because of all the uproar.

Stern is essentially untouchable, more now than ever since the move to Sirius. Plus Stern has the advantage of being known as a guy who will say anything. Imus may have the same reputation to an extent but since his show is on MSN he's also thought of as more news oriented than Stern.

Lastly, is there a worse thing you could do to kids with cancer than send them to Imus' ranch? I'd be begging to be shipped off to Neverland instead.

Point is, that anyone listening to Stern who hears an offensive comment from him are paying to hear it. Its not a moral stance, but it is reality.

The flipside is that Imus is broadcasting over the public airwaves, so even if the FCC isn't cracking down on it (and it shouldn't) the license holders still will respond to public pressure tactics to varying degrees.

Besides, I'm not particularly interested in defending Stern over Imus. I find one funny and the other a bit of a blowhard but that's beside the point. I think Imus is more of a straight up political chat show. He has politicians on regularly. Stern has porn stars. And Imus isn't satirical like Daily Show, Colbert Report and to a far lesser extent, Stern. But mostly, Imus isn't a comedy guy and the others are. He is on MSNBC, as someone else pointed out.

This has nothing to do with Sirus versus regular radio. The FCC will not be fining, firing, commenting, or do anything for that matter to Imus. This is about public opinion on words said. Imus's audience isn't the once that complained. So if Stern said it to this audience, and someone else heard about it and got fired up - it would be the exact same thing. It has nothing to do with people paying to hear it. People paid to hear Michael Richards do comedy (who knows why) and because some guy pulled out his cell phone he got in trouble. Although I hate using that reference (Richards), because once again his was out of anger, while Imus was a failed attempt at humor.

FYI: what I posted was from his days on regular radio.

By putting Stern's past comments in here, my point was to prove that it happens all the time, but for some reason this one has become a rallying cry, and I don't think it's deserved. Did Imus say a bunch of "mean" things before? He sure did - it comes with the shock jock label and lifestyle. He says things to shock people, to get the water cooler buzz. It's his job. Same as Stern. Imus just happens to be a little more out of touch with modern society (I think) and wasn't aware that what he said would be deemed so offensive.

My main beef is that people are using this as some huge out justice when it was a failed joke. Should he punished? Sure. If you say something that rubs people the wrong way, you have to pay the consequences. I just don't think he deserves to be fired. I wish people would look more at context and not the 2 seconds worth of words. Anything taken out of context can be very bad - and it sets a horrible precedent. All performers, writers, entertainers, etc should be sticking up for this.

I heard Snoop Dogg blasting him, saying he should be fired. For someone who has made a career advocating drug use, debasing women (he brought women on stage in dog collar and leashes once) talking about killing people, etc - I would think he should fight a little more for the ability to say what you want. He can HATE what he said, feel it is horrible and racist. But, Imus is an entertainer, you don't have to like him or what he said - but he should be able to say it if the intent was to entertain, which I think it was.

My other point was why a comedy-based (that is that the show is, news and comedy) radio show is held to a different standard than stand-up comic or TV show, etc.. Both use racial-based humor all the time. People who don't have any idea of what the show is heard what he said and jumped in without knowing facts. That to me is dangerous ground.

As to me bringing up Devin, is was merely to illustrate a point that most people could relate to. Devin did not come in here and fly the civil rights flag, but he does write material that can be considered offensive. He does on a public website that's purpose is to both entertain and inform. Once again, he has every right to write whatever he want and it is usually great and very funny. My problem is that there are people in here who have given him props for comments that COULD BE offensive to someone. I find it a huge double standard and because we are talking about an old white guy saying something about a group of black people this has been made into a media event.

I think Imus has every right to make bad, off color jokes, same as Stern, same as Devin, same as Dave Chappelle, or anyone else who is entertaining. Go ahead and suspend him, but let's not paint him as the leader of the KKK or some anti-black movement. It is a very large jump.

Brian, allow me to quote myself.

Because Imus is broadcast over the public airwaves, technically everyone is his audience, even if they don't necessarily tune in. At least that's the perspective from the owners of the stations that put Imus on the air. Thus, they bend to public pressure, like it or not. Not advocating it, per se, just trying to see the undelying motivation.

And like I said, its not really a joke, its just a put down. There's no satire in Imus. Calling his show comedy is really stretching it and even if that fits, he has no credibility when it comes to racial humor (as Beaks points out in his editorial.)

Stern may say racist things, but he also lampoons KKK members whom he invites on the air, frequently has black people on his show who speak frankly about race, and invites conflict between them.

Brian, if Imus' CBS show featured him telling bad jokes about black guys being dumb, ugly criminals, would you still defend his job position due it being a case of "failed humour"?

And some of your earlier analogies are terrible. Generalisations over the disabled, and off-colour jokes about the JonBenet Ramsey case, don't come from the same place as gags concerning the entirety of a race who are still fighting to be accepted as equals in modern society. No other type of homour carries the social weight of racist banter.

And a jump that no one is making. No one's saying that he's the Grand Wizard, or that he should be arrested or not be allowed to say he wants. The first amendment forces us to tolerate other's speech, but it doesn't force individuals or companies to embrace it or pay the person to say it. So MSNBC can suspend or fire him, and people can encourage them to do so (even black people who you don't personally like). That's not a restriction on free speech, it's the consequence of it.

As far as other people saying offensive things, that does nothing to defend the case at hand, but I'll go with it for a moment. Now, I'm not going to defend Howard Stern, since I stopped finding him funny about the time I got a learner's permit, or the big furry ball of hate that is Devin, so let's focus on Danson. What he did was different because of the forum, the scope, and the attitude. The forum was a Friar's Club roast, which is probably the most open forum that has ever existed for shocking and offensive humor. It's the place where Gilbert Gottfried did a 9/11 themed version of the Aristocrats less than a month after it happened. Everyone knows what they're getting into there. Second, Danson's bad joke was a broad one that didn't single out a small group of people the way Imus's did, as has been mentioned before. Third, Danson's blackface was a thought-out attempt to lampoon racism. It didn't go over as he intended, but there was an idea behind his racist bit bigger than "black people sure look funny". Imus was searching for something funny to say, and settled on mocking the appearance of the team he was talking about in racist terms. Really, racism is all about attitude, and there were completely different ones in Danson's and Imus's missteps.

Edit: Which is a long-winded way of saying what Pop Zeus said, that there is no attempt at satire in the Imus thing; it's just an insult.

Now sponsers are pulling out. He's finished.

Watch him end up on satellite.

To go back to the Stern thing - his comments I posted were on regular airwaves. So your argument there is not valid. I didn't see Sharpton or Jesse Jackson calling for him to be fired. I didn't see anyone (and he had a much, much bigger audience then) calling for boycotts. Maybe bcause he has a black woman on his show - he can get away with it. That's pure hypocrisy. You can't have it both ways. You can't say because he has a black co-host he can say things about blacks. It's either wrong or it's not.

In addition, I'm sick of hearing the people who write about this, saying that they also don't agree with the lyrics in rap music. First off, rap music has nothing to do with this. It's a whole different thing - but a lot of people keep brining it up because the same words can be found. Some stupid, uninformed person will say "well if rappers can do it, why can't he?" - which is just silly. However, the response is typically "I don't like those words in those songs either". Okay, well why aren't you boycotting stores who sell lyrics? Why not boycott rappers shows or picket them? This just comes off as a matter of convenience. You can't sit there and say the word should never be used, now. If you really don't want those words used, it should be bigger than Imus - and for some reason it's not.

It doesn't matter if you think it's funny, but his show is intended to entertain and inform and titillate. He doesn't need to be credible for racial humor. How are the South Park guys or Mel Brooks? They did it, and did it well. His comment wasn't meant to be gut-busting funny - it was just a little remark. Everyone is acting like he just started bashing them for hours. It was a quick comment and they moved on. If his intent was to be racially degrading, I think he could have done it a lot better. It was a quip to make people chuckle. Not a good one, but NO WORSE than a ton of this shit we see and hear every single day. Everyone just jumped on this bandwagon without knowing a lot of the facts.

Once again, one of my main points. If this is wrong, if you want to stop this - you had better keep going. Don't start and stop at Imus - which is what will happen.

Shit, I hate doing this because I think Imus is an unfunny douchebag. I just think that everyone heard one comment, took it out of context and raised their "rasict flags" so everyone could join in on the fun of bashing the man.

Imus also houses poor black kids who have cancer. He's also had black politicians on to discuss things. How is that any different?

You are saying because he makes fun of Klansmen, he can make fun of blacks? That's bullshit. First off, Imus has been making fun of all sorts of people for thirty years. In addition to all the black humor people have posted, I'm sure you could post a shitload of other things he has made of white people about. I think it's wrong that certain things can be fun of, my certain types, and only if you make fun of other things.

This isn't about Stern versus Imus anyway. I don't really want this to go that way. My point in bringing him in was to show that people say this stuff all the time. Does it make it right? No, but let's not act like this is the first time it's ever happened. The "outrage" of these words is not inline with reality. I just want a few people to step back and take a look at the whole situation.

Yes! It would be in bad taste , but if want to try it - so be it.

As an entertainer, you should be able to do whatever you want to try. If people don't like it, they will react (as we are seeing) and you might suffer, but once we start saying how and when you can't do something it starts a very bad chain reaction. What if all racial humor becomes banned? Sounds silly now, but once you say that "this subject" is off limits, entertainment suffers. What happens next is what people should be asking.

Larry the Cable Guy blasts Muslims and other things in his act. A lot of black comedians make fun of how white guys act. Great! They are not for me, I won't tune in - but they should be allowed to do it.

In somewhat related news, Steve Harvey said on his radio show today (and I'm paraphrasing "I can say these things because I'm black, but he can't because he's white". So now we have special rules? So now there is an unwritten rule book on when and where and how you can use words?

There are consequences to what you say - Imus is dealing with them, I've said that all along. That's the beauty of free speech. You have the right to say what you want - but you must be prepared to accept the retaliation.

I'm not advocating for someone to run around the mall saying the word nigger, some of you are completely taking this the wrong way. I don't use the word, and don't like to hear it. But should the word be banned? People keep saying that anyone who defends this, must want to be able to use it. How is that even close? If he was reporting the news or worked for ESPN, it would be different. It's their job to be impartial. Imus is a morning show disc jockey. His role is not to just give you news and move on - it's state opinions and entertain.

He did not put down the entire black race. He made fun of a women's college basketball team. This is what I have a problem with. You just said my main problem - he put down a race of people who are still trying to be accepted. WHAT!? He said they were "nappy headed ho's" - it's what he thought. Dumb and out of date thing to say sure, but no less shocking then anything else he, or anyone else said. He said nothing about blacks people. He didn't trash their race or degrade their people. He was talking about how the woman had tattoos and looked rough. He then said the infamous comments. I don't see how making a comment about one group, put down the entire race.

The use of the word "nappy hair" is a black sterotype (albiet a truer one - Can I say something I heard from a black man regarding this "Our hair is more tightly wound, so it can be considered nappy". See I had to say I heard it from a black man <who I was having a beer with at the time <cause I have black friends>, in a comedy club <we are both doing stand-up> - I have to say that because if I did it without, I could be labelled racist, which is such bullshit> he also pointed out how there are books and such written by blacks, talking about their "nappy hair") so he used a reference to their hair style (which is typically associated with black people) and one that can be considered true.

He also used the word "ho", which last time I checked can be a black woman or a white woman or an Asian woman, etc. It is not race specific. Is it degrading to women who might not be a "ho"? Sure is. But the word by itself is not racist in the slightest.

So, by putting the two together, apparnetly you have created a racial bomb? I can see how people can be offended, but the severity of their outrage, does not seem to fit the crime. He said they looked "rough" as well. Have you ever seen a women in a bar, who described as looking "rough". Maybe she had some tattoo and was built. It has nothing to do with race, yet that keeps coming up as well.

The use of the phrase "nappy headed ho's" was a poor choice of words, but I really don't think the amount of attention this is getting is inline with the offense. I am just shocked at the complete hyper sensitivity to this issue.

I understand why they are doing it, they don't want to be connected to the issue. I don't blame them.

Remember the Snickers commercial that got pulled during the Superbowl. Do you think the creators were aiming to make fun of the homosexual population? They used some common serotypes and to try and make an entertaining advertisement. Somehow it got labeled as homophobic even though I highly doubt it's intent.

We live in a very PC world, where you have to be very careful what you say. That's fine - but how can some of you sit there and not see potential implications of this issue. Anyone can be offended by anything, you have no idea what could set them off. That's a dangerous ground for those of who are fans of entertainment, especially comedy. Once words, situations, or types of people are off limits.... scary thought where it could end up.

Of course it was homophobic. It was a gay panic joke and it was incredibly over the top. Imagine if the joke had been a white man kissing a black woman and being horrified and resorting to violence.

Here's the thing - you seem to have zero understanding, or interest in understanding any aspect of minority experience in this country. The way that people are portrayed in movies and television are HUGE factors in how they are looked at and even their own vision of themselves. It seems like every fucking internet nerd gets this when it comes to geeks - we love to see geeks in movies portrayed not as pathetic losers but in that Kevin Smith way. You guys all understand that because geek is the minority group to which you belong. But you're unwilling to put yourself in someone else's shoes.

Thank-you, Captain Obvious.

Don't panic. Imus isn't doomed because Al Sharpton wants him fired. He's doomed because he's a dottering old fool who doesn't have the sense to wait this out. You cited Howard Stern earlier (I'm a fan, btw). He has said terribly offensive things for twenty years. Much worse things than what Imus said here. But he's still working and wildly successful to boot. Know why? Because he's not a moron. He knows how to stand up to his detractors and fight them off. What I'm saying is, most broadcasters allow themselves to get censored. And that's called giving up.

Waitaminute. Why do you think that's fine?

Once again, I look at the commercial with intent. They took a stereotype and played off it. I don't think their goal was to bsh the gay lifestyle. Same thing Carlos Mencia does, Dave Chappelle, etc. Should that be used for commercials? Maybe not. But taking a stereotype and using it for enjoyment or getting a laugh has been around a lot longer than you or I. There are good and bad examples, but they fall into the same catergory.

I think this is my biggest beef with you. You have ZERO idea of what my background is, who my family is, who I live with, work with, etc. You have assumed because I don't think this guy should be fired that I don't get it. I never once said the words were a smart choice.

I hate to pull out this card, but am pretty comfortable stating that I talk to, enjoy company with, and are friends with more black people than you. I don't know what your life is like, but I know what mine is like and I live a very multi-cultural world. I didn't set out to be that way, it just is. I have had this same talk with black women and men over the last couple of days and some agree with me and some don't. I'm fine with that. But it is irresponsible of you to say what I do or don't know about.

Now. you've made me play some stupid card, which I think is dumb. Did you know that every couple of months I perform comedy for mostly all black crowds and make them laugh. I deal with race, and point out the rights and wrongs. I then sit at a bar, and drink with them.. GASP!!! Sometimes I even buy them drinks (or they one for me)... OMG!! See, you have NO CLUE what I do or what my experience is. You assume because of my stance that I don't get it. I shouldn't have to justify what I say, but apparently unless I "deal with the black man" I cannot be on the opposite side.

I think sometimesyou don't get it and are talking out both sides of your mouth. You think this is disgusting and horrible to make an off color comment (by a white man), but a retard or pedophile joke is just fine. I have an issue that one is considered worse than the other. I also think if you want to say something in the right forum (whether it's a movie review or talk radio show) and try to squeeze a chuckle out - you have a right. I get very nervous when certain forums start to regulate how and what you can say.

How many times do I have to type that I don't give a shit what happens to Imus? I am not a fan. Plus, I've already stated that he fucked up by the way he handled this. Stern does a much better job at it. But let's not forget that Stern modeled his style from Imus (and others) so all he is doing is improving on what he learned. This isn't about Stern versus Imus, jsut the fact that they have both done it for a very long, very long time. This should not be the first time it is such a big deal.

I don't think it's "fine". I was stating that society has become that, I accept it.

Bob, I am really shocked that as a Stern fan (which I knew) you aren't sticking up for him a little more. Hell, even Howard said he shouldn't be fired, because it would effect him. If Imus can be fired for this off color comment, who knows what could happen to Stern or many, many other jocks of that style?

I can't believe you pulled the 'I have black friends' thing.

To be fair, if we're to believe the volume of drug-taking Devin admitted to in the ATHF review, he's probably talked to a lot of coloreds.

How the hell else am I supposed to convince you of what I know? You sit there and tell me that I don't know - I had to tell you that you were wrong. Plus, in case you didn't notice, I already said that I hated I had to do it and knew it would sound bad. I pointed out that I was fully aware of how it sounded - way to notice and not recognize that.

Edit: That comment is total bullshit, Devin. You put me in a corner, telling me I have no clue about dealing with minorities. So how is there any good way to say I do? You cannot make a blanket statement about someone and not allow them to defend themselves. When I say what I know, you put that down as well. You offer no way out - that's a total shit move.

I have said since the beginning that his words were dumb and he must suffer whatever happens. I've said the exact same thing as you. I think people have taken what was supposed to be an off-color joke and turned into a race war. That is wrong in my book. I think intent got lost in all of this, got overlooked - that is the main thing I disagree with.

The problem with pulling the "I have black friends" card is that it doesn't mean you can actually understand thier viewpoint. Didn't you see that South Park episode? It really means nothing. It's why it is always a bad move.

Here is Devin's comment:
I then said I have talked to black people about this issue. I wanted to understand and discuss it with them so I can make sure I am as informed as possible. Those are factual statements in response to Devin's comment.

Plus, apparently suffering from the same selective reading as Devin, I stated how bad it sounded and that I shouldn't be doing it. I was fully aware of how it sounded. I did it anyway, but pointing it out seems odd, when I already did.

My whole argument here is not about what he said. It's about people not dealing with intent and reacting to the words themselves.

The problem, Wehman, is that while no one here 'knows' you, you do have something of a 'virtual identity' and people can take what you say and put it together to create an idea of who you are. So, when you say things like 'this is blown out of proportion and things are getting too PC when a douche bag that called black women nappy-headed hos gets kicked off the air for doing so', people are able to make assumptions about your mindset. If you really think that national media members using such a stereotype, and not doing so in a joking manner (he's not joking with them, he's insulting them. That's what Imus does) doesn't have an effect on black women and helps to destroy their self-image, than people are going to assume you just haven't placed yourself in their shoes.

This isn't anything like a Dave Chappelle skit where race is lampooned. This was a targeted racist insult by a guy known for doing so.

The intent doesn't matter. The result was a commercial that showed two men so repulsed by their lips barely touching that they had to resort to physical violence to prove they weren't gay. All to sell a candy bar.

And the thing, Imus has said his intent was to be funny. So he was joking around at the expense of a bunch of young women who only reached the pinnacle of their sport. How's that funny?

I don't think Imus should be fired for this (fire him for being an unfunny blowhard). I think he's ultimately doing himself in because he doesn't know how to handle this controversy. I'm just mentioning Stern because he's a prime example of someone who knows how to handle this kind of thing. If Imus could have spun this properly he wouldn't have lost sponsers and his job wouldn't be in jeopardy. It's pure business.

And for the record, what he said was obviously coming from a racist point of view because he has failed repeatedly to say what his "real" intention was. So I won't shed a tear.

Stern also has enough smarts to keep a token black amongst his crew. Imus just has a bunch of white guys sitting around shooting the shit.

Why can I not make fun of it? Why are they off limit?

You ever read ESPN.com? You know, where Bill Simmons and others talk about how boring women's basketball is to watch? Just destroying the womens final four or the WNBA. They are making fun of young women at their pinnacle - so I really don't think that's the case. If he had aid they were "ho's" none of this would have happened. If had said they looked like horses (a common jokes made on sites like ESPN.com and Jim Rome and other sports talk shows) none of this would have happened. It was because of the "nappy headed" comment.

I'm not saying it's right or wrong, I'm just saying the women angle is not even part of this. It's the race issue.

I've noticed that Brian tends to get totally shit-canned by folks on this board for saying fairly reasonable things in a reasonable way. He's not ranting or anything--he's very clearly trying to say things carefully--but he somehow gets taken to town for not understanding minority culture.

Do I agree with him? Not neccessarily, but that sure as hell doesn't prompt me to take a leap and essentially call him a sheltered white boy who just doesn't get it. We can debate without tossing off comments like that.

And I really don't want to derail this thread, but I could take Wehman's Stern quotes up there and annote each one with an explanation of how those jokes work on an ironic and/or satirical level.
Imus' "joke" did not.

We agree on this.

This is where I think you are being a little bit of a hypocrite. Read the above from Stern, you think that doesn't come off as being racist?

See Bob, I could do the opposite. I could very easily tell you how racist they are. Anyone could. I don't need to because I know he was trying to get a laugh - Imus was doing the same.