Imagine if President Bush said someone should be fired.

Don’t be silly – the President has toadies to handle that sort of job. Remember Ari Fleischer and his “Americans need to watch what they say” routine?

GRAAGETOUGSAHYYEETWEPTHAAARIFGOASDG!!!
I’m gettin’ Tasmanian Devil, right?

Obviously it’s better to NOT fire idiots. Examples abound.

So, people who say racist, ignorant things are all Obama critics? FIRE DON SURBER!

What a nappy-brained ho.

Would the firing of Imus simply push him to satellite radio?

We do need to take care to expose the bigger cats like Limbaugh and Beck. Do we advocate firing them all? Then does that mean that Air America can fold? I support the firing of Imus. But I question the prescient here.

Imus was just a cowboy-hat wearing libertarian asshole who made occasional racist and misogynist comments. Beck is an asshole who shouldn’t be paid for the wingnut comments he makes DAILY.

Private citizen Obama simply cannot make statements about the appropriateness of a shock-jock calling female basketball players “nappy-headed hos”. Private citizen Obama should have had his media groupies rake the disloyal rabble-rouser. That’s what Bush does.

On a related note, I am concerned that Barack Obama will force me to smoke cigarettes. This clog-up-my-lungs mentality is unpresidential.

Ah, Imus makes it easier. He hints at retirement.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070412/us_nm/usa_race_imus_dc;_ylt=ArtP.Xqk08QjnpU8zVrmDcbMWM0F

I wish our candidates would speak out MORE, against Coulter, Beck etc.

Surber just made a powerful effort in his attempt to best the “long jump to ridiculous conclusions” world record.

Imus is a “critic” of black culture in much the same way as the Klan.

Surber’s comments aren’t just dumb; they’re psychologically revealing.

This off-with-his-heads mentality is unpresidential. Imagine if President Bush said someone should be fired.

Wait, wait, wait. Isn’t that why we have a new General in Iraq? Isn’t that why we have a whole flock of new generals in Iraq? Isn’t that why we lost a bunch of US attorneys?

WTF?

Once again, it’s RIGHT when the rightards do it, it’s WRONG if we do it.

Good point that the leap from criticizing Imus to criticizing one’s critics is a long one.

However, I think Obama hit the wrong note here – isn’t he meant to be the candidate of racial reconciliation?

If Don Imus is beyond redemption, how many other folks won’t make Obama’s cut-off? How big is his tent, anyway?

Or, if we are going to judge Imus by the worst thing he did, rather than by the best, how much time should we spend dwelling on Obama’s coke use in school?

I think John Edwards had the right response talking about forgiveness, but now I can’t even find a link to it.

Hey, the President needs to have unlimited authority to wage war, re-write laws, ignore laws, lock people up without charges, torture people, spy on phone calls and mail and email.

I mean, if it’s George W. Bush and he’s a Republican.

If it’s NOT George W. Bush, then PANIC!! RUN!! RUN!! THE PRESIDENT HAS TOO MUCH POWER!! NO ONE COULD POSSIBLY STAND UP TO PRESIDENT BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA BIN LADEN’S SWEET SWEET TALK AND UNRIVALLED GOOD LOOKS!!

NOR COULD ANYONE STOP HILLARY CLINTON FROM MURDERING EVERY LAST PERSON NAMED FOSTER AND SURRENDER THE UNITED STATES TO THE UNITED NATIONS AND THE NEW CALIPHATE!!!

Surely we must all come together to stop the abuse of Presidential Authority and the Separation of Powers, I mean, when it is a Democrat.

For now, though, we must remain resolute in allowing George W. Bush Jr. to do anything he wants within any space/time continuum he may or may not perceive.

Decades ago Alexander Cockburn had a funny thing to say about people using the “Am I alone in thinking–?” trope.

His example was, “Am I alone in finding child rape an objectionable mode of conduct? In your last issue, Alexander Cockburn, (etc.).” I read it once and remember it thirty years later.

It’s an interestingly disingenuous assertion of vanity, and a neat little pirouette of passive-aggressiveness to boot.

Yes, Don. You are all alone. God speed.

Everything is not equivalent. Calling a bunch of bright, successful young college atheletes who have done nothing but exemplify the very best of what’s inside us “nappy headed hos” on OUR fucking airwaves is so far beyond acceptable speech that Imus simply must go. This is not something that can be condoned. Or forgiven.

It’s funny, really. Usually it is Teh Right that is trying to kick us around for exercising “moral equivalence”, such as the very reasonable thought that the US military, in raining bombs, rockets and artillery down on civilian neigborhoods are every bit the terrorists that the guys who flew those planes into those buildings. But my goodness, look how quickly they will duck behind a position that pretty much equates a curmudgeonly insult with an ugly racist, mysoginist rant against a truly admirable group of young innocent women…

mikey

I tried really hard to not post anything on the Imus snafu, but it finally got the best of me. I’m afraid my stated opinions on the whole clusterfuck aren’t entirely in alignment with yours. But, y’know, we’re grown ups. We can agree to disagree. Or change the subject to who would win in a Superman vs. Thor knockdown-drag out. (I say Thor. Thor has a magic hammer, plus, Superman has been being written rather sissyish the last decade or so. I say, Thor would shove Mjolnir up Superman’s Kryptonian ass and turn Kal El into the Last Popsicle From Doomed Krypton.)

Tom- I don’t see how being for firing Imus is against racial conciliation.

If this was the I-man’s first-ever slip-up and he apologized for it, then hey, that’s fine. But the guy has a history of saying really obnoxious stuff all the time, and then backing off of it when he gets caught. And then next week, he goes back to saying the same stuff. After a while, you have to question how sincere he is.

Now, I don’t honestly care if the guy is fired or not. Reasonable people can disagree on this. I think a lot of this stuff has been really overblown, since Imus and other shock jocks say much worse things on a daily basis. I’m much more of a talk-and-let-talk sorta guy: let guys like Imus and Rush and Savage spout stupid B.S. so I can enjoy making fun of them. But I can see why some people would call for Imus’ firing, just like I can see why some people would call for Bill Maher’s firing in the wake of 9-11.

Or, if we are going to judge Imus by the worst thing he did, rather than by the best, how much time should we spend dwelling on Obama’s coke use in school?

One of those things happened years ago. The other happened last week.

Imagine if President Bush said someone should be fired.

By refusing to fire even the most feckless and incompetent aides he has, he’s managed to keep this to a hypothetical.

Dunno, Brad. Here’s what Maher said:

“We have been the cowards, lobbing cruise missiles from 2,000 miles away. That’s cowardly. Staying in the airplane when it hits the building, say what you want about it, it’s not cowardly.”

Maher’s statement, while clearly objectionable to many people and pretty badly timed, was ultimately a principled judgment about the relative virtue of those who choose to kill others by various means. It was supportable by means of rational argument. Imus, on the other hand, took a completely unprincipled (and therefore unsupportable) swipe at a group of powerless people who had done nothing to warrant the attack. Not that I care whether Imus keeps his job or not — just wanted to point out that there really is an important difference between speaking an unpopular truth to power and flinging bigoted poo at bystanders.

Also, regarding Obama’s tooting — until I see evidence that whatever he snorted in college caused him to stupidly and maliciously cause harm to someone in the course of carrying out his paid duties, I’m gonna say that the passage of time is a less significant difference between his actions and Imus’ than the qualitative difference is.

The “youthful indescretion” precedent has been set in stone. Anything a political candidate has done before his political career kicked in has now and forever been rendered a moot point for his campaign.

That, or you’re willing to stand up for double standards for Democrats over Republicans.

Yep. It’s 2007. Anybody who was young in the mid 70s to the mid 80s likely did drugs. I’d be more concerned by a fifty-something politician who said he didn’t ever touch drugs. Either he’s a completely facile liar, or he wasn’t part of mainstream America growing up and therefore is not qualified to hold a leadership position in America.

mikey

I, for one, am thrilled at Imus swallowing all this shit, no matter how it turns out. It almost makes me want to see my pollyannaish 70ish aunt who LOVES Imus and quotes him every goddamn time I hear her speak.
Not that it would give her cause for introspection, she don’t do that, but it’d be fun getting into the civility vs decency argument with her.
“He didn’t swear.”
“He’s a racist old fuck of an asshole who somehow offends me more than Rush the few times I’ve listened to him. At least Rush knows he’s lying. Maybe this could lead to you re-examining the things you say about pro athletes and how much nicer everyone was back when popular culture was whiter, excuse me, I mean cleaner.”
“You just swore.”

From Brad:

I don’t see how being for firing Imus is against racial conciliation.

If this was the I-man’s first-ever slip-up and he apologized for it, then hey, that’s fine. But the guy has a history of saying really obnoxious stuff all the time, and then backing off of it when he gets caught. And then next week, he goes back to saying the same stuff. After a while, you have to question how sincere he is.

I am just guessing here, but I suspect a lot of candidates for racial reconciliation are going to have a long and inglorious past. Are they still eligible under Obama’s purview? Or is he offering reconciliation for those who don’t really need it?

My advice to him (as if!) would have been that the role of race-baiting black is well-filled by Sharpton and Jackson, and he really ought to try a different approach if he wants to run as a different sort of campaigner.

As to Imus’ sincerity – how the heck would I know? I would guess he is truly upset that he offended these young women, but I also suspect his sincerity is tempered by his justifiable belief that he is neither a racist nor a bad person.

I know it’s been said by a bunch of others, but it really is annoying that the Imus flap is all about the “nappy headed” and not at all about the “ho.”

There’s a similar problem with tbogg’s recent gaffe in which he referred to Condi Rice as “Brown Sugar.” The outrage there (and the much more abundant faux outrage, which is a shame, because there is, in fact, something to be outraged about) is all about the “Brown” and not at all about the “Sugar.”

Denigrating to black people? Very Serious. Denigrating to women? Hardly worth a mention.

Last time I checked there were more than twice as many women in the US as black folk. So why ignore the misogynist component of multiply bigoted statements like these?

I would guess he is truly upset that he offended these young women,

You really think so? Then why in god’s name would he’d a said it in the first place? I mean, it’s not like it just slipped out and he knew he screwed up instantly. And it’s not like anything he said could be even remotely considered complimentary, and he was just unhip to the lingo. Really. For pete’s sake, he called them “ho’s” and that’s not a nice thing to call someone you don’t know well. This is basic shit.

My advice to him (as if!) would have been that the role of race-baiting black is well-filled by Sharpton and Jackson, and he really ought to try a different approach if he wants to run as a different sort of campaigner.

How on Earth is calling for the firing of someone who regularly makes and allowsthe most horribly racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, classist bigoted shit on his nationaly broadcast show “race baiting”? I mean, seriously, explain that, please. Hellfire, Obama didn’t say anything about not forgiving Imus of his foul bigotry, he just said the foul bigot shouldn’t have his plumb job if he can’t fuckin’ behave himself.

Ya know, one thing that’s been lost in all this is our culture is in such a shape that a rich white bigot has a job being a rich white bigot, and important media and political figures take his dumbass seriously. That’s a bad thing. The good thing is the dumbass bigot’s getting his ass handed to him over it, and a whole lot of people are seeing where a whole lot of other people stand on this issue.

And, man…I gotta tell ya, you might want to work on that “Jackson and Sharpton are black race-baiters” thing. Growing up, I heard a lot people of position in my little rural community expounding, with all sincerity, the importance of knowing the difference between “good niggers” who knew their place and “bad niggers” who made trouble. Maybe it’s just a knee-jerk reaction on my part and I apologize if I’ve totally misread you, but your advice struck that same chord when I read it.

I would guess he is truly upset that he offended these young women,

Well that’s sweet. When the fuck did conservatives start needing hugs and validation? He should take responsiblity for wildly offending these young women and half of society and resign. If he won’t do it, his employer should assert their responsibility to do it for him.

I am just guessing here, but I suspect a lot of candidates for racial reconciliation are going to have a long and inglorious past.

Do you think it’s some blanket statement granted to everyone? Seriously? Some people actively seek redemption, other people petition for it in the most cynical way possible (some could give a shit and don’t want it to begin with). Obama’s not just going to wave his hand and ‘forgive’ because he’s got some saintly power to do so. And in this case — the unprovoked attack on young women who did NOTHING to merit any attack, nor had any power to push back on a media bully — I don’t see why you think this is a great springboard for reconciliation. It should start with a penitent act, not a racist AND sexist one.

Hell, Obama still showed more restraint toward Imus than you do in your post toward Jesse Jackson for his lifelong fight against racism and, presumably, the remarks he made 23 years ago and asked forgiveness for.

how much time should we spend dwelling on Obama’s coke use in school?

Dunno. How much time did we spend dwelling on W’s coke use 12 years ago?

As to Imus’ sincerity – how the heck would I know? I would guess he is truly upset that he offended these young women, but I also suspect his sincerity is tempered by his justifiable belief that he is neither a racist nor a bad person.

Fuck all that. He doesn’t care that he offended those kids. He cares that he’s paying a price for offending them. And he may genuinely believe that he’s not a plain and simple racist but so what? Jonah Goldberg considers himself knowledgable but that doesn’t make it a justifiable belief. Imus has had a recurring skit for a while now where one of his unfunny stooges impersonates Omar Minaya, GM of the Mets, and portrays him as a moron (think, “my name Jose Jimenez”) while Imus sits back and laughs like the cracker he is. I’m sure if someone had made a big stink about this Imus would have appeared to be very sorry once he realized he was in trouble for it.

Technically, running against an incumbent officeholder is calling for someone to be fired. Generally, the incumbent has said critical things about you, as this is how campaigns work. I think this means John Kerry was unpresidential by default, and I suspect it means Dubya should never have been governor. Also, when you become president, it is accepted that you will fire various cabinet members and replace them with your own, so I think that’s probably unpresidential as well. Um. What the hell was Don’s point again?

This off-with-his-heads mentality is unpresidential.

But it certainly is Queenly. Especially when the beast has as many heads as Imus.

Imagine if President Bush said someone should be fired.

Bush does: he just says it to a lackey, rather than the media.

I would guess he is truly upset that he offended these young women,

I would guess that he doesn’t give a toss about offending them, but he’s cranky that he’s being called over it.

but I also suspect his sincerity is tempered by his justifiable belief that he is neither a racist nor a bad person.

And I also suspect that every serial killer has the belief that his killings were justified. Just because we believe something, doesn’t make it true.

Who reckons this is Limpet, masquerading as a human?

one of his unfunny stooges impersonates Omar Minaya, GM of the Mets, and portrays him as a moron (think, “my name Jose Jimenez�) while Imus sits back and laughs like the cracker he is. I’m sure if someone had made a big stink about this Imus would have appeared to be very sorry once he realized he was in trouble for it.

Some stooge (probably the same one) does the same shtick as Alberto Gonzalez. Is that equally outrageous?

Or, if no one is screaming on behalf of Minaya and Gonzalez, does that mean it is OK?

My guess – Imus is a shock jock. You know what they do? They say offensive things.

He doesn’t care that he offended those kids. He cares that he’s paying a price for offending them.

I lack your keen insight into the human soul. My guess is that he gets used to being ignored, and really didn’t think he had done anything more than flap his lips in business as usual. Having been apprised tha tthese players were genuinely upset, i furhter imagine his remorse about that is real.

But as I said, I don’t know Imus as well as you apparently do.

How on Earth is calling for the firing of someone who regularly makes and allowsthe most horribly racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, classist bigoted shit on his nationaly broadcast show “race baiting�?

If Obama is on the same side of the issue as Sharpton and Jackson and the opposite side from Edwards, Clinton and may others, I see him as allied with professional race baiters.

Growing up, I heard a lot people of position in my little rural community expounding, with all sincerity, the importance of knowing the difference between “good niggers� who knew their place and “bad niggers� who made trouble. Maybe it’s just a knee-jerk reaction on my part and I apologize if I’ve totally misread you, but your advice struck that same chord when I read it.

Let me excerpt a bit from that in reply – grow up, jerk. I apologize if I’ve misread you, but I think I am being told that every white guy who disagrees with you is a racist.

I lack your keen insight into the human soul.

True dat and you’re not fooling anybody here with your tired schtick. For practice I’d recommend a little soul searching to figure out why exactly you’re reaction to a white man getting in trouble for racist remarks is to get on the internet and go after Obama. Why are you so afraid of him?

Matt T didn’t misread you at all.

Does Shoelimpy have another sock puppet, or are the wingnuts completely drained of new tactics?

but I think I am being told that every white guy who disagrees with you is a racist.

Wow. You’d have to be pretty delusional to get there from Matt’s post. Oh wait. I get it. It’s that whole black/white false dichotomy dealio. You guys are good at that shit. Know what? There’s a couple more interpretations one could get from what Matt had to say, but you’d have to care about understanding and communicating and not just trying to make some kinda stupid point. Know who comes out looking stupid when you go down this path? I think you do, babe…

mikey

– Imus is a shock jock. You know what they do? They say offensive things.

And when you make a habit of saying offensive things, you need to realise that you may offend people.

Having been apprised tha tthese players were genuinely upset, i furhter imagine his remorse about that is real.

Do you? Do you really? Well, that’s interesting. Do you saunter into your parent’s house and called your mother a raddled old whore? Do you think she’d be upset? I think she might. Furthermore, I think any reasonable person might expect that applying a very similar insult to these players would make them upset, too. Genuinely upset.

So I can’t imagine why you imagine that Imus’ remorse is real, given that he could probably have guessed that the women would be upset. Genuinely upset. I mean, in a non-feigning sort of way. Really genuinely upset, is what I’m getting at here.

But as I said, I don’t know Imus as well as you apparently do.

Perhaps he’s a genuinely kind old man who devotes his spare time to working with troubled youth in black neighbourhoods, had heard the lingo, and thought it was ordinary.

Or perhaps he’s a white racist, sexist, bigot who doesn’t care who he insults.

If Obama is on the same side of the issue as Sharpton and Jackson and the opposite side from Edwards, Clinton and may others, I see him as allied with professional race baiters.

Oh, you mean ‘professional race-baiters’ == black people?

Odd, isn’t it, that those who are inclined to forgive and/or be lenient with racists are the white folk, and those who want to be stricter with racists are the black folk. There’s a very similar tension at work with feminism: I for one get very, very tired of constantly being told I’m a feminazi, that I hate men, and all the usual vicious slurs that sexist pigs can dream up. Every time a woman complains about the behaviour of a man, I hear a drone of justification as to why men are the oppressed class and women are the oppressors.

Which, I’m sure you’ll agree, is complete and utter bullshit with a cherry on top. And I’m sure you’ll also agree that there are millions of men who believe as I do, that sexism is as pernicious and poisonous as racism. But sadly, many men are willing to forgive and forget sexism, just like many white people are willing to forgive and forget racism. White men, of course, like Edwards and Clinton, can forgive both, since they’ve never experienced either.

I apologize if I’ve misread you, but I think I am being told that every white guy who disagrees with you is a racist.

I don’t think so. I think what he’s saying is that you seem to be requiring that black activists should be meek and forgiving of all the wrongs done them, or they’ll be classified as ‘professional race-baiters’. Which boils down to the good-niggers-bad-niggers dichotomy.

If you could provide an incident in which either Sharpton or Jackson demonstrated race-baiting credentials, that would help your argument. After all, I’m not as familiar with their history as I could be, and I may have missed a prominent strain of race-baiting in their actions and arguments.

I’m gonna tell you why Imus is unemployed tonight. It’s not about racism or misogyiny, not primarily. It’s about about fairness, and about who we are and what we can swallow. See, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Gwen Ifil, Barack Obama – no matter how you feel about them personally, you know two things about them. One, they are public figures. They went out there and put their ideas on the line in the marketplace. And two, they’re big guys. They’ve got money, and support, and if you take them on you’re very liable to soak up a real counterattack.

Imus has said some truly dispicable things over the years. But for the most part, he’s said them about big tough folks who had the wherewithal to defend themselves. Sure, anybody could have seen he was a racist bigot, but at the same time he played in the big leagues, and so he kept getting away with it.

This time was different. How to even say it? These young women are truly the best and the brightest, everything we want our society and our kids to be, a real dream of brilliance and ambition and effort and success. They are everything we love about the fictional America, everything we want her to be. They represent the innocence and opportunities of youth, the unlimited possibilities available to very gifted people who put themselves in the position to succeed. He tore down everything we love, everything we admire, everything we want the next generation to be about. They didn’t ask for it, they didn’t get in the public discourse, they did great, they won in athletics, in school, in life. We admire their discipline, their courage, their ability. And that asshole reduced it all to “nappy headed hos”. Fucker. I don’t care what happens to him. I care deeply what happens to those admirable young women.

And that, my friends, is the difference…

mikey

You just think that everybody you disagree with is a nappy-headed ho.

So there.

As to Imus’ sincerity – how the heck would I know? I would guess he is truly upset that he offended these young women, but I also suspect his sincerity is tempered by his justifiable belief that he is neither a racist nor a bad person.

Wait a minute, Tommy boy. In one breath you know nothing about Imus; in the next, you think his belief that he isn’t a racist is “justifiable,” which in the real world would normally mean that you DO know something about him. Of course, trolls like you don’t live in the real world. You live in a world where you think you can argue that someone you know nothing about is a real nice guy with a good heart and not a racist bone in his body, and that people will actually respond, “Oh! Of course, you’re right, and calling black college students ‘hos’ is just evidence of niceness!” What we now know about YOU is that you’re just as racist, sexist, and fuckheaded as Imus. So get lost.

If Obama is on the same side of the issue as Sharpton and Jackson and the opposite side from Edwards, Clinton and may others, I see him as allied with professional race baiters.

Didn’t answer my question. Again, how is calling out racist speech from someone with a history of making and allowing racist comments “race baiting”, and it can’t be because Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson have said a word. That’s really not a good excuse, and furthermore, just because Sharpton and Jackson have done what some may consider objectionable things in terms of dealing with race in America, it doesn’t excuse Imus nor does it make anyone calling him out on it “race baiting”.

And I really don’t understand how Sharpton and Jackson’s involvement instantly makes that opinion wrong. I mean, I have issues with both men’s past actions, but that doesn’t mean they’re wrong here. Had they not got involved, would you still be telling Obama to be quiet and concilliatory? Let’s play a what if…Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton have been silent and Obama still calls for Imus’ firing: does your “advice” still stand? If not, why not? If so, then explain just what the problem is with anyone, much less someone who’s actually directly affected by racism in America, calling out racist speech? Where’s the line where race baiting come in, or does it just automatically happen when Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton speak?

Let me excerpt a bit from that in reply – grow up, jerk. I apologize if I’ve misread you, but I think I am being told that every white guy who disagrees with you is a racist.

Nope. You’re not even being told your “advice” is racist. You’re being told that what you wrote as “advice” for Barrack Obama looked all the world to me as you telling him not to be a “bad nigger” like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton. You’re fine with that, it’s fine with me. You’re free to explain to me how I’m wrong or you’re free to do what you did, which is tell me to fuck off, more or less. I didn’t once call you a racist, which I would if I thought pure racism was the motivation.

I accept your apology, though. It’s no skin off my nose if you’re racist or not, but I do note that you didn’t answer any of my questions.

And fuck this “he’s a shock jock” bullshit, that’s the most pitiful excuse of them all. If you’re job is to offend people, at least have the common courtesy and basic dignity not to piss and moan when the people you’re trying to offend point out that you are, in fact, a fucking asshole. That’s just horse shit, man.

being on the same side as Sharpton and Jackson = being an ally of professional race baiters? your stance raises a number of questions. does this make everyone who eg. criticised Trent Lott in 02 wasn’t expressing genuine outrage over racism but merely cosying up to disreputable race-baiters? do we have to wait till we know where Sharpton et al stand before we can form an opinion? is this standard just for racial issues or does it work across the board? if you agree with Sharpton on health care or the war on Iraq, are you still an ally of race-baiters or merely an ally of professional outrage merchants grandstanding for personal gain? after all if memory serves, Obama was with Jackson and Sharpton in the Iraq war debate and on the opposite side to Clinton, Edwards and “may others”. is this more evidence of his perfidy or just a terrible lapse of judgement on his part?