previous post next post  

Heh. Imus gets fired.

By The Armorer on April 13, 2007 | | Comments (27) | TrackBacks (1)

Imus got canned by CBS.

"There has been much discussion of the effect language like this has on our young people, particularly young women of color trying to make their way in this society," CBS President and Chief Executive Officer Leslie Moonves said in announcing the decision. "That consideration has weighed most heavily on our minds as we made our decision."

Ludacris gets meetings with Obama (last year, to be sure).

Okay.

It's all clear to me.

Reverend Al is all happy with Imus getting canned, but he's not apologizing to any of the Duke lacrosse players, is he?

"It's not about taking Imus down," Sharpton said. "It's about lifting decency up."

Since when you pompadoured buffoon? Where's your campaign to take down the gangsta rappers?

Heh. Just, heh. How do we take *any* of these people seriously?

I've got no brief *for* Imus, I'm just stunned at the hypocrisy of it all. Oh, no I'm not. I didn't just fall off the turnip truck.

Gimme some of what Jason Whitlock, local KC sports writer, is having.

Imus isn’t the real bad guy.
Instead of wasting time on irrelevant shock jock, black leaders need to be fighting a growing gangster culture.
By JASON WHITLOCK - Columnist

Thank you, Don Imus. You’ve given us (black people) an excuse to avoid our real problem.

You’ve given Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson another opportunity to pretend that the old fight, which is now the safe and lucrative fight, is still the most important fight in our push for true economic and social equality.

You’ve given Vivian Stringer and Rutgers the chance to hold a nationally televised recruiting celebration expertly disguised as a news conference to respond to your poor attempt at humor.

Thank you, Don Imus. You extended Black History Month to April, and we can once again wallow in victimhood, protest like it’s 1965 and delude ourselves into believing that fixing your hatred is more necessary than eradicating our self-hatred.

The bigots win again.

While we’re fixated on a bad joke cracked by an irrelevant, bad shock jock, I’m sure at least one of the marvelous young women on the Rutgers basketball team is somewhere snapping her fingers to the beat of 50 Cent’s or Snoop Dogg’s or Young Jeezy’s latest ode glorifying nappy-headed pimps and hos.

I ain’t saying Jesse, Al and Vivian are gold-diggas, but they don’t have the heart to mount a legitimate campaign against the real black-folk killas.

Gimme summora dat!

Update: Players on the Rutgers basketball team are getting hate mail? Feh. While I have no worries about Castle visitors on that issue I'll offer the following guidance.

1. Don't send hate mail. It's gauche and pointless. If your life is that bereft and barren with Imus leaving the air, you need to be contemplating your navel and your life, not harassing other people.

2. If ya gotta send something, drop a note to that zombie Imus and his posse, the craven lickspittle Moonves, the Pompadoured Buffoon Sharpton and his sidekick Jesse (yes, I've suspended the Rulez for this post).

3. I still await the announcement of the War on Gangsta from the Reverend Al "It's about lifting decency up." Sharpton.

Another update: Rich Lowry, of National Review, on the "bonfire of the profanities":

The unedifying Imus controversy is almost entirely a liberal conflagration, a perfect bonfire of the profanities: with journalists and politicians caught out ignoring their own standards of political correctness; with left-wing grievance-meisters doing their grim work on the mainstream media’s favorite shock jock; with the culture of victimology running its ritualistic course. Armed only with the dubious loyalty of his frequent guests, Imus didn’t stand a chance.

The rest is worth a gander.

Share This Article:

Categories:

1 Trackbacks

TrackBack this entry at http://www.thedonovan.com/cgi-bin/mt41/mt-tb.cgi/7073

CBS fires shock jock Don Imus from Unpartisan.com Political News and Blog Aggregator on April 12, 2007 7:12 PM

CBS fired Don Imus from his radio program Thursday, the finale to a stunning fall for one of the nat Read More

27 Comments

By ry on April 12, 2007 8:20 PM
Yeah, I love it when Whitlock shows up on the Sports Reporters. Dude lays waste in an equal oppurtunity fashion. He doesn't care about race. He typically doesn't express 'race' loyalty. Dude's just a stone cold 'Murican whose lines of decency are crisp, clear, and have no extra points added or taken away for ethnicity. His complaints about Imus I could stand, like NOW's(since they're about the only consistent group in this whole nonsense). Like I've said to a blog friend, which ended my commenting at his place, if you accept irreverence and uncouth behaviour, even celebrate it by watching it, you have to accept that which transcends your limits of decency to be fair and equal. Imus passed the lines of decent conversation, or even thought. So what? We celebrate others who do that. Like Stewart and the Daily Show. Carlos Mencia and most of the Comedy Central lineup. SOuth Park for sure. Will Farrel? You betcha. If you've ever watched and enjoyed any of the in-house fare at Cartoon Network you better not be complaining about Imus. If you liked the Jerky Boys(Tarbash is totally a stereotype, and a denigrating one) or Crank Yankers you helped bring this about by making 'naughty boy behavior' popular. I'm with Whitlock. This is just a thing where some people get to pretend piousness. Which, apparently, some blog friends don't like me saying.
 
By BloodSpite on April 12, 2007 9:34 PM
I must restrain myself. Being a former Native of Georgia and still considering myself a son of Georgia, I have no words of grace that are to be delved for Rev's Jackson and Sharpton. That being said they did a wonderful job, As Whitlock pointed out, in 1965. I haven't heard Sharpton apologize to that ol gal he got busted with up in DC way back in the day either. But then under the current standard, she'd have to apologize to him.
 
By Maggie on April 12, 2007 11:20 PM
The women of the Rutgers basketball team said they were offended. That's all that matters. It is not my place to question that. It is not my place to ask them to justify it. It is not my place to compare it to anything else. If they are not offended by rap music, that is their call. If they are offended, but choose not to speak against it, that is their call. When white people say "What about rap lyrics?" all I hear is my son Frank justifying some transgression with "But Tom did it too!" This episode is about what Imus said, not about what 50 Cent said. If a woman of color is more offended by Imus than by The Game, I completely understand. My sister Grace and I were vicious to each other, yet heaven help someone who looked crooked at Grace. In Charlestown there was a pecking order, kids on the Hill, kids from the Bricks, kids from the Catholic schools, kids from the Publics. Yet I have literally climbed over people to have the back of someone from The Town simply because they were from the Town. I would defend Nancy Pelosi to a Frenchman! So if Vivian Stringer wants to sing along with Snoop Dog or JayZ and get angry when some old white guy calls her girls nappy-headed h0s.......I get it and I back her 100%. As far as Sharpton goes, he's a nitwit. So what? His hypocrisy doesn't excuse Imus and it doesn't diminish the insult felt by the Rutger's girls.
 
By Casey Tompkins on April 12, 2007 11:54 PM
Sure, ry. Now why not come up here to Cincinnati, and I'll drop you off in Lincoln Heights, or Woodlawn Hills? There you are perfectly welcome to call the local women nappy-headed hoes, or jigaboos, and see how far your enthusiasm for "cutting edge" irreverent humor gets you, before they stomp your butt into the ground. The references I do recognize, I generally have no use for anyway. Stewart is a self-important jackass, and a little South Park goes a long way. I'll admit Mencia is hard core, but I've never seen or heard him use that kind of bigoted, insulting language. Whitlock was mostly on the money, until he started complaining about rap. I have no use for rap as it is generally produced today; I find the lyrics hateful, violent, and misogynistic. Whining that Imus didn't say anything that rappers haven't misses the point, as Maggie quite appropriately points out. If you can't grasp that two wrongs don't make a right, or that a black calling another black man (and a friend) a "niggah" doesn't make it ok for some random white guy to call the same man the same thing... I just can't help you. ...or maybe I can. This just occured to me. Would you be upset if the New York Times put a full-page, hard-core explicit sex photo on page 1? What if the same shot were on a public billboard? Would you object? On the other hand, if a woman went to an adult bookstore, and bought a magazine full of such photos, would you object to her doing so? After all, it's the same photo (or set of photos), no? The main difference here is context; what may be appropriate when purchased for private use may not be appropriate on public airwaves. Someone might buy something to listen to/see/experience in their own home, but that doesn't equate to a public figure using the same form of expression on public, freely available performances.
 
By Jon The Mechanic on April 13, 2007 6:58 AM
I guess that when my grandpa taught me that wrong is wrong, no matter who did it, I took him too literally. Maggie, Casey, thanks for explaining to me how all people are equal, however, some are more equal than others.
 
By John of Argghhh! on April 13, 2007 7:51 AM
Heh. I'm not about Imus. I'm about Sharpton. I'm not about the Rutgers ballplayers, either. I may have missed it - did they call for Imus to get fired? Casey has a point about public airwaves, though there is an element of choice about that, too. Perhaps I'm confused on Maggie and Casey's points a bit, though - it seems that you are basically saying it's okay to call for Imus's head, and get it, and be silent on Gangsta, even go purchase it (and that, too, is a product that goes out on public airwaves), and that the two things are separate from each other and don't constitute hypocrisy and worthy of being called on? Again - I may be conflating things here. Certainly you can complain about Imus and not complain about rap. And you can want to focus on what Imus said because that was aimed at the players personally, and not feel that rap is... However: When we start talking the consequences of things, and taking away people's livelihoods (not that Imus is going to suffer here in that regard but that isn't relevant) and making big public spectacles, and working to change policy (As Sharpton is with CBS) - I don't get to point out that the problem is bigger than Imus - and that it's rooted in the sub-culture that produced the term Imus used? And that the issues *are* related? Or is it just too early for me?
 
By BillT on April 13, 2007 8:12 AM
Well, our illustrious Guv, Jon Corzine, is in the hospital. Car wreck on the Garden State Parkway while he was enroute to "moderate the meeting" between Imus and the Rutgers Team. Two questions immediately came to mind: 1. Why offer the governor's mansion to host and "mediate" a non-event, and 2. Since seatbelt use is mandatory in NJ, why wasn't the Guv buckled up? Libs...
 
By Instapilot on April 13, 2007 8:17 AM
Remind me never to piss off J-Pod: "...Al Sharpton, a rampantly infectious venereal disease that masquerades as a man..." That left a mark...heh. Instapilot
 
By BillT on April 13, 2007 8:23 AM
And as far as Sharpton goes, two words: Tawana. Brawley. The "Reverend" Al has yet to apologize to the six cops he castigated as rapist bigots, nor did he say, "Oooops -- my bad!" to then-Gov. Mario Cuomo for declaring him to be in cahoots with La Cosa Nostra and the KKK. Libs...
 
By Maggie on April 13, 2007 8:26 AM
I don't know about where you live, but in Boston the commercial radio stations edit rap music. The graphic lyrics can only be heard online and on CDs, not on the public airwaves. I have 19 year old boys in this house so I am familiar with it. I listen to these stations and I own some of these CDs. Jon - I have no idea what your point is. You also get to be the final arbiter of what offends you and I will not ask you to justify it. John - The players did not call for Imus to be fired, they wanted to wait until after they met privately with him. I agree Imus' remarks are endemic of a sub-culture, but it's not rap music. Imus was not influenced by rap music. I think that those who are happy Imus was fired heard Bull Connor, not Ludicris. I have been astonished at all the references to rap music in this discourse. I heard an old white man who had no regard for the feelings of people who he considers "less". All his protests about he is not racist do not move me one bit. Does he have Tourette's? How did those really awful things just *pop* out of his mouth? Too bad he is on the wagon, otherwise he could have gone into rehab and told us a story about some priest in his youth. Again, as far as Sharpton goes, I don't believe he had that much influence here. I don't think anyone feared some kind of boycott or consequence from him. I think those sponsors didn't want their products associated with him. Period. One of his sponsors was Lumber Liquidators. The owner told the local talk radio guy in Boston that he had a black girlfriend. I don't imagine The Rev. Al influenced that decision.
 
By BillT on April 13, 2007 8:38 AM
Mags -- There wasn't a peep from any of Donzo's sponsors until *after* his comment became a media circus. Three days after the event. Personally, I'm surprised Imus had an audience at all; he stopped being funny sometime in 1985...
 
By John of Argghhh! on April 13, 2007 8:43 AM
Your points are well taken, Maggie - but the fact remains Imus was canned right after the meeting with Sharpton. Like I said, I've not been supporting Imus, I've been attacking the Pompadoured Buffoon. I also think you are being a little blinkered if you think the message of the "edited" rap music is somehow diluted because of bleeps and voiceovers. And I also think that Imus, whatever his motivation, picked up the term from the popular culture. And I just object to the fact that it's okay for Ludacris to say and sell it, but Imus must get fired for it. Because at bottom, the same failing is evident. Disrespect, but a wildly disparate response to same. Because Ludacris and his fellow gangsta rappers have a *far* greater impact on society than does Imus. But you just poof away Ludacris, and snarl about Imus. I think that's a forest for the trees kind of thing - whatever the merit of removing a single diseased tree might be - failing to address the larger infestation simply means... the infection still spreads.
 
By Maggie on April 13, 2007 8:46 AM
Bill - Agree completely on the Corzine comment, on both counts. I also agree with everything written about Shaprton. However, even a stopped clock is right twice a day. What does it matter how the sponsors found out? I don't imagine that they listen to every episode of every show they sponsor. I also agree that Imus isn't funny, but when he has on the guy who does the fake cardinal, I cry laughing. (Which goes back to my previous arguement. "the cardinal" character makes fun of Irish Catholics and I find him highly amusing. But I wouldn't suggest that some Sassenach or Boston Brahmin use a derogatory term about Irish Catholics in my presence.)
 
By Cricket on April 13, 2007 9:13 AM
Can we add 'Crown Heights' to the Tawana Brawley scandal? Rioting for four days over an allegation of non treatment and one death. Interesting that you bring up Tawana Brawley...that case has some interesting parallels to the Duke lacrosse players case. Nifong's career is on the line. Oh well. I guess when a shark chums the water...
 
By fdcol63 on April 13, 2007 9:24 AM
The unfortunate reality (well, there are several here ....) is that people like Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, et al thrive on creating and perpetuating racial tension. They've created an entire industry out of it, and they know that their continued influence, power, and livelihoods are dependent on it. It's simply not in their interest for America to ever become the color-blind society that Martin Luther King dreamed about, and which many of us would like to see become reality.
 
By BloodSpite on April 13, 2007 9:26 AM
I can't cast rap out of the spectrum. Essentially you have Sharpton who practices, and I'll go ahead and say it because I'm just that way, what is tantamount to reverse discrimination. kdwill, my good friend and co-blogger pointed that Sharpton's antics, rap music, the whole gangsta methodology and Jackson's antics get shoved under the rug when it comes to "Somewhere we must draw the line in what is tolerable in mainstream media," Sharpton said Sunday. "We cannot keep going through offending us and then apologizing and then acting like it never happened. Somewhere we've got to stop this." So...if thats the case...when does Sharpton become accountable for his actions? Kdwill's response (and one he's debating blogging on as a African American whose mother picked tobacco in North Carolina) is "white guilt" I'll let him explain it, but it makes a quasi sensicle sense....although it stinks. And it's something that probably won't change. But I myself want to see equality...true equality...like in the Army...we're no colors we all are "green". Instead of the current evident and blatant double standard.
 
By BillT on April 13, 2007 12:19 PM
What does it matter how the sponsors found out? Not "how" -- "when." Not a peep from them until the Bobbsey Twins started making boycott noises -- again, *days* after the circus came to town...
 
By AFSister on April 13, 2007 3:07 PM
Imus getting fired of this is just CRAP. If he's going to get fired for saying "nappy-headed ho's"... why not fire singers like Ludacris for using the same language in songs? Why not arrest the Dixie Chicks for (among other reasons) murdering Earl? Let's arrest Gore for stealing the idea of inventing the internet. After all- they're just words, right? I mean, Ludacris just sings about ho's, using crack, and driving drunk- he didn't really MEAN it did he? The Chicks didn't really kill Earl, did they? Gore didn't really invent the internet, did he? I know Tupac's dead, but did anyone raise a stink about the use of the word "nigga" in his hit song, "Changes", which was all about getting the black community to change their lives around and STOP killing each other and selling drugs? No... no... can't do that- he's a BLACK man, using the word. Yeah, "nappy headed ho's" wasn't the best choice of words, but if you listen to the whole conversation, he was playing off of his co-host who said something about them being "ho's"; Imus then added the "nappy headed" part. It may have been offensive, but firing him over that is just ridiculous. If he had been a black man, it would be the joke of the day- not the "hang whitey for his racist comment of the day". Double standards... I HATE them.
 
By ry on April 13, 2007 4:11 PM
Heh. Do you people think I like this stuff? Father Guido Sarduchi, Mencia, and all that? Hell no. I hate it. I watch it when I'm at other people's places or get outvoted. It's all, what's the word I'm looking for? $hit. Sarduchi was at least moderately funny because you could tell he at least liked what he was mocking, but the rest? Give me a break. Casey, dude, sure, I'll come up there, if you go to So Cal and say the stuff Mencia does at the corner of Bristol and 17th St in Santa Ana, CA. I absolutely dare you, wedo. I guess exposure to an ethnicity sensitizes you to what they find offensive. Really, go there, find out what the Latinos will do to you. Such comments are silly, man. They proove no point other than to show how piously sensitive you are. That, that you're sufficiently pious, is not the point, besides being a non-sequitor. You blow way past the point, bro. Some people can say or do evil things and we give them a pass because it's 'art' or whatever. Calling for it to end makes you a prude or a square. Remember the furor over Married with Children? Was the Michigan mother who complained about it right? On merits, yeah, she was right. The show had a caustic quality to it in how it skewered and celebrated stereotypes and conflicts. But it was funny, or so most of the country thought, so that was okay. (Which is why I've come to the point where I say everyone has to get thicker skin. say you hate it and move on.) Imus on the other hand, or Jason Richards, well, people didn't find the joke funny. So that makes it evil. Chris Rock? Funny, but his stock and trade is race denigrating jokes similar to the Jason Richards comment, but since people laugh Chocolate Jesus? Art. Burning the Flag? Political statement. 50 Cent? Art and social commentary? Imus? Racist. WTF? Star Wars Epsisode One? Racist. The movie 'How High' which mocks rap listening Asians, South Asians in general, midwestern Caucasions, and 'white's in general? Rip roaringly funny and nothing to get upset about unless you're a racist cracker(known from first hand experience). How does this make sense? It doesn't. So call a turd a turd and be consistent. You start going down the Oprah path, but i felt offended, and you've opened up the Pandora's Box that is indentity politics and grievance mongering as well as not setting real boundries for a society to live by. Nope, just a bunch of amorphic and hazy and contradictory guidlines, if you can call them that. People don't want a Manichean world, fine. Then the only rule I can then see is: prepare to be offended. I'm pissed over the hypocrasy of it. I have nothing for Imus. I hate the guy as much as I hate Howard Stern and the laundry list of people mentioned above. It's the double standard and how we rationalize it all that pisses me off. How can AFSis explain to her kids that calling thier female friends 'their sluts' is a bad thing when they do it but it's okay for their friends of another colour to do it? It makes no sense. Which is why I like BlSp's approach. We're all Mutt 'Muricans who all get pissed at different things and decide to let it go. Sure we yell about it, but we don't take it so seriuosly that we end someone's career or ruin their lives. Has anyone been following the aftermath of the Duke case over at Newsbusters? The logic employed by some here is exactly what leads to Rose McGowan saying, in effect, that she didn't care whether the three players were guilty but should stand and be punished for their 'group crime' anyway because someone once made her feel bad who was like those kids. but hey, I'm gollum and nobody cares what I think anyway.;) Back to polishing the Portcullis de Argghhh! Someone ask Boq where the Brasso is, wouldya?
 
By kat-missouri on April 13, 2007 6:56 PM
1) I don't like Imus 2) I don't like Jesse 3) I don't like "al" Sharpton 4) I despise mob vigilantism, something those last two are good at, pretending to be judge and jury. 5) yes, I think this language thing is a bunch of BS since it has become pervasive in our society. 6) You will never catch me saying the "N" word or "nappy headed" because I think they are inappropriate, regardless to whom or about whom I am speaking. I have used the word "ho's" in humorous conversation with some girl friends. Which puts me in the position of these young women. I am quite certain that if somebody I didn't know used the word against me, I would understand it was not funny, but offensive since that person would know nothing about me. My private conversations with my friends are my own and are funny because the word is used as an ironic statement since none of us are. It's called "owning" a word. Like "chicken hawk". Is that a double standard? Yes. But no more than a bunch of Marines calling themselves "jarheads" and being offended if somebody who is not a jarhead calling them that. Or, when a Navy guy jokingly sings "in the Navy" by the village people, but would take offense if some civilian he didn't know starts making fun of him using the same song. We have come to the point where we may poke fun at ourselves with our own stereo types, but it still doesn't mean that the stereo type is appropriate or that you do not know what it means when somebody outside of your dialectic uses it against you. That is where Imus failed. He IS an old whiteman. He IS not funny. He has NO in with the black community. Particularly with the young hip-hop crowd. He is OUTSIDE thus his words do mean soemthing else. he could not cross that lexicon, however much he wanted to be "hip" or pretend to be "in". REgardless of what he said about what group, sooner or later, when you do that, you are going to come up against that group that you can never become a part of and you are going to say something that offends. And there is certainly no way that Imus was going to become a hip, young black woman. 6) as far as rap music, the language and what you tell your children or how difficult it is to explain, there are many difficult things in this world that we have to explain. don't blame it on the music. it's just one more in a complicated world. Like explaining why our black friend has a white (step) son and a mixed race daughter. Or why people on TV shoot each other, but we don't advocate shooting each other on the street when we are mad or someone does something wrong. Or why there is a jack daniels commercial on TV, but they shouldn't drink. Or why 19 Muslim men from the middle east killed 3000 people but it is not okay to hate all arab or Muslim people. That is part of growing up, deciphering the difficult things and making good decisions.
 
By John of Argghhh! on April 13, 2007 8:15 PM
Heh. I just wanted to bust Sharpton for being a hypocritical pompadoured buffoon.
 
By kat-missouri on April 13, 2007 8:36 PM
I agree. He is kind of like a clown. Or, like those over acting actors (eddy murphy) acting like a black baptist preacher on Sunday morning so you get the whole "funnY" thing about black baptist preachers. except "al" is supposedly not an actor. Still, kind of funny in that cringing sort of way once you get over the whole "al" Sadr similarities. then again, I don't find ol' "al" sadr very funny so I guess that shows you how I feel about old "al" sharpton.
 
By AFSister on April 13, 2007 9:33 PM
How can AFSis explain to her kids that calling thier female friends 'their sluts' is a bad thing when they do it but it's okay for their friends of another colour to do it? It makes no sense. Nope. It doesn't. Which is why I make sure my kids realize that not all language is appropriate, not all songs are appropriate (although it is funny as hell to hear a 5 year old sing "I like big butts" and "Ride a horse, save a cowboy"), and that all people are to be treasured and treated as equals. It's this sort of socialization that has lead my oldest to have best friends who are "brown" (asian and african-american), and to accept handicapped children as equals who just happen to be physically different. My kids may be caucasian, but I'm raising them "green", like the Soldiers in Bloodspite's Army experience. I just wish ADULTS could see the world "green", instead of as individual races against each other. There simply isn's such a thing as racial superiority, but for some reason, the thought exists.
 
By AFSister on April 13, 2007 9:39 PM
I should add that I also closely monitor the tv they watch, including cartoons. I absolutely HATE Spongebob, Fairly Odd Parents, Ed, Edd & Eddy, Rugrats, and others for the language and themes they present. Why let them watch cartoons which teach species superiority, parents are stupid, idiots are funny, and babies are stupid? I'd much rather let them watch cartoons like Jackie Chan Adventures, Pink Panther, and SuperFriends.
 
By ry on April 13, 2007 10:59 PM
"
He is OUTSIDE thus his words do mean soemthing else. he could not cross that lexicon, however much he wanted to be "hip" or pretend to be "in"."
ANd thus, why such a set-up ultimately fails if, and only if, one wants to be fair and consistent. You create and in group and an out group(racial policy), going just natural personality traits, in this manner. Someone who can be offensive and get away with it and one who cannot. Cemented it. Never can we all be 'Joint' or 'Purple' but always a disparate group at pissed at each other(ooop, I better not use those, I'm not of the proper group). Joy. I also think, regardless of whether Imus has an 'in' with any group is immaterial. Many a comic has had no in with my social group in So Cal, those of us who group using 'like' outside of Standard ENglish rules and Val Sprechen, but mocked us none-the-less. What's her name who wrote 'Clueless' used it to poke fun of teens and Californians. She had no 'in' with my group or my age group. So what? Is it magically out of bounds because of that? Is social commentary and study of a group allowed only if you're of the group? Someone tell Martin van Crevald to quit writing his inciteful and outstanding books then, he's not allowed. ANd someone tell Gore Vidal to stop writing about Catholics 'cause he isn't one of us. Someone take my keyboard away because I'm not a soldier nor am I trained analyst(should I even be at Argghhh! then?). This 'group' thing also fails because groups are not homogeneous monoliths. You can have an 'in' with a small sub-group of people within a group that isn't recognized by the larger(which means I can't say that chapelle doesn't have an in with the Caucasian community, nor can I say that Vidal doesn't have an in with Catholics). It doesn't work as a group is too diverse to allow for such, especially when you're talking about a national event or performace. It ultimately winds up with 'I can say it, however hurtful, but you can't.' I can tolerate my Wife doing that. She tells me straight out that that's what she's doing. She doesn't try to rationalize it and pretty it up. She accepts that it's hypocritical. She just doesn't care so long as I do what she wants. (And believe me, we've been a lot happier since we figured that out and I stopped arguing about whether it was consistent with other comments or even rational. I simply jump when told. Every husbands first line of defense.) 'Reclemation of Words'(and symbols) is also a place where we find this double standard. The pink triangle has been reclaimed. It's not a symbol of shame or a mark of dysfunction as it was used by the Nazis, or in the US just after the 2nd World War. It's a gay pride symbol. The Pink Pages are San Franciscos gay friendly telephone book, once proudly emblazoned with a Pink Triangle. But the Confederate Flag and the moniker of Rebel? Hey, sorry to all my Southron friends, I hate farkin' hate the COnfederate Flag, but if one can reclaim something as distasteful and vile as the n-word and the pink triangle they ought to be able to reclaim and rehab the Confederate Flag and the designation of Rebel into something respectable. If the word 'fag', one of the worst epithets in American culture, can be reclaimed and made a positive why can't the CF? They're just not the cool kids so they aren't allowed. They just have to accept the negative group image of being Southern if they're going to accept Southern at all. You may refuse a Manichean set-up, these words bad and always bad. YOu can't deny that then choosing to allow for group rage is then hypocritical if someone outside that group uses it since it is impossible to rule out that someone has an in with a community. Particularly with artists and entertainers. Whod've thought that Martha Stewart would become friends with what's his name at the MTV awards. But I garaun-damn-tee you that if Martha Stewart, despite having said in, said what Imus did she'd be just as vilified by the offended community. It simply does not work. So we don't want a binary world, it'd be boring and prevent us from being hip, we then have to accept that we will be offended by others 'being cool'. PArticularly with those in the entertainment and social commentary fields. Really. Look, the Chocolate Jesus, when looked at simply as a sculpture, really is a fascinating piece of work. The detail this guy pulled off was amazing. But it's still offensive. So what. He's a social commentarian and an entertainer/artist. Whatever happened to the adage that art had to be somewhat subversive? It's simply a double standard no matter how you dress it up. Lipstick on a pig doesn't make it a beauty queen(and no amount of Southron phrases will ever make me a Southron). Now, I do agree as for daily interactions that Kat's arrangement is a good rule of thumb. If you don't know them well enough to know whether they'd be offended then don't do it. But basing whether social commentarians and entertainers can say or do something based on their 'in'-ness or 'out'-ness? That's just racism and classism justified with different words. Person of group A can do it but nobody in group B can, or they can if someone in group A has declared them to be a client. How very Roman, we're back to clientage. You can get away with it if you're under the protection of some 'family'. It simply isn't making sense nor is it in line with any form of judging someone by the content of their character or egalitarianism I've ever heard of. And why isn't John getting popcorn? What, we ferrets aren't dancing enough to keep you entertained with this thread? Punk.;)
 
By ry on April 14, 2007 12:43 AM
Something else I came acrossed tonight.
Brentwood Middle School typified the institutional rot confronting Goodloe-Johnson. When she arrived, just 3 percent of the 440-student downtown school passed state tests, continuing a 10-year pattern. Police were routinely called. Turnover was so bad that second-year teachers were considered veteran. And race relations were so tense that a white teacher there filed a federal discrimination suit in 2004, claiming black students regularly called her, among other things, "white cracker, white honkey, white whore," with no intervention from the principal. White students backed up her claim, saying they were also routinely pelted with epithets. [snip] Amid the controversy over academics, the lawsuit filed by the white teacher went to trial, ending with a $307,000 verdict against the district. A federal judge labeled the school a "hostile workplace."
Gee, so white hs girls getting called "white 'ho" and being offended by it doesn't result in an official response, nor national outrage. I wonder why? I do not buy the 'they were offended so that means it was wrong' line of reasoning. That's letting your class be taken over and run by the kid who throws the biggest tantrum. That's the old and discarded prudish(resident prude speaking) legal test about pornography. The most prudish Churchmouse and bible thumper decided. There's good reason why SCOTUS moved away from that, many a court case, and opinion why that's the worst policy to adopt. Call me overly rationalist if you want(what was the name of the governor in Baron Munchausen?), but it simply doesn't compute.
 
By Cricket on April 14, 2007 4:20 PM
The reason that didn't make the 'newz' is because the teacher took it to the authorities and then went up the chain and got compensation in the courts. My parents taught us that if you are going to make a difference you have to have a change of heart...which is something a Good Man taught a long time ago. You watch. Rev. Al and Jackson are reading blogs or have their people reading them and they will try to turn it around, but I think they have jumped the shark on this one...and will fade. Of course, the heir apparent is Milak Shabazz to take it to the next generation.
 
© 2008 John Donovan
All rights reserved.