Posted on 04/10/2007 4:27:25 PM PDT by Stajack
I’m writing to those I consider my ideological brethren, after reading a lot of the commentary here regarding Imus’ latest rhetorical “riff”. I believe that most Freepers are, like me, disgusted at the ill- conceived stab at “humor” by him and his sidekick Bernard McGuirk. But in the aftermath of his actual words, Imus sought to make amends with Sharpton and Jackson. This was a brilliant move that accomplished two things. First, it caused a lot of us to take our scrutiny off of Imus, and to focus on the utter hypocrisy of Sharpton and Jackson. Second (and more importantly for me), it PROVIDED COVER FOR THE ENABLERS OF IMUS. Who am I talking about? Let’s see, Tim Russert, David Gregory, Chris Matthews, Howard Fineman, Jonathan Alter…the list goes on and on. These folks are enablers because for 30 years their ilk has enhanced the reputation and prestige of Imus, all the while winking and nodding at his verbal missiles. What have they gotten in return? A PLATFORM TO LAUNCH IDEOLOGICAL WARFARE AGAINST US AND THOSE WE SUPPORT. Ironically, in the midst of the withering scrutiny of Imus, Sharpton and Jackson, most of the enablers are morphing into “objective” journalists attempting to help Imus "find redemption' so we can all "move forward together”. As I’m writing this I see Brian William sweet talking the Rutgers coach , Vivien Stringer. To Williams and Co., I say STICK IT. Freepers, these are the same folks who would tar and feather Bennett, Limbaugh, Hannity or ANY CONSERVATIVE in similar circumstances. But because of our fixation on Sharpton and Jackson, the enablers are getting a pass. This is AT LEAST as much political as it is racial. Eye on the target, PLEASE.
Seems the people insulted were the female athletes. It wasn’t far from character for Imas to be such an ass. People want to debate whom should be punished, whom should apologize, whom should be offended, hell, even whom should sue Imas. The real crux goes unaddressed in it all. What Imas did was in his typical character, a character which the network wants on the air to profit from. The real source for a solution has to be the smeamy network which is so damn bigoted when they can profit from it. Imas is a pig. Sharpton has proved he’s a pig. Jesse JAckasson has been a pig for decades ... but all of these pigs are a resource for a bigoted network(s). THERE is the problem. Such attitudes at the top of networks end up insulting athletes, politicians, presidents, common folk, etc. in the name of profits. They don’t give a damn about building up this nation so long as they can profit by trashing it.
As you well know........
You are a fine analyst. Nice to meet you.
You lost me somewhere around providing cover for the enablers.
I suggested you read it again because you appeared in your post to not understand......And thus my point was you seemed lost to the poster's point.
I dunno, is that clearer?
Redneck, whitey and cracker don't send me off of the deep end either.
What I took away from this comic's opinion overall was that if you ban one man from saying 'nappy headed ho', you must ban all men from saying those words.
Perhaps a cringe point was reached. An old fool talking like young fools has that kind of effect on people. Sort of like Grandma appearing on Girls Gone Wild in her Brittany Spears outfit. It's the cringe effect.
I am not so sure this is not a staged publicity stunt. Wouldn’t surprise me. Rush said today that he did not know that Sharpton had a radio show. Now, everyone does. And, maybe the team and Sharpton can get some money from the corportation, just like Jesse Jackson does (shakes corporations down for money).
Sharpton has been known to pull some stunts before. Remember the Brawley incident? Even after Sharpton found out the girl lied, he still continued.
Don’t get me wrong, I am not taking Imus side in the matter, I don’t trust either one.
There is no “banning”. Imus is free to continue to spew, just not with somebody else’s microphone.
All good points! I can’t stand to be in the room is someone switches to Imus. He was on the radio here for a while, but the Milwaukee stations dropped him fast. We got local talk shows in the morning hours.
as a freeper with wavey brown hair, I’m still trying to figure out who this Imus guy is.
I mangled it....Hey, I'm a man. Cut me some slack...LOL!!
Yep, I basically liked that guy.
Best FRegards,
Sid Rosenburg showed up on Ash Wednesday a couple of years ago with an ash cross on his forehead. Imus thought it was hilarious. I didn't hear any regret published much less an apology to Roman Catholics or people of Christian faith.
I would like to see this liberal wingnut far out of sight and sound and it would be good riddance as far as I'm concerned.
FWIW-
I appreciate your views. In my mind, the trash talk from Imus ought to be unacceptable from anybody, including every group aligned with the Democrats. Ordinarily, every such group and individual enjoys “political correctness” status by definition. If Imus’ remarks had come from the mouth of, say, a Democrat U. S. senator from a state that would be hard to hold for the party without him/her, my guess is he would already be foregiven. Apparently, Imus put himself up in that status, since he talks with them often on his program as if they are equals. But he has learned that he really doesn’t hold a key to power for anyone, so he can be thrown over the side (maybe) if the party’s needs demand it. My guess is, though, Imus will get a pass with a wristslap, because that is the prerogative that comes with being an operative for the Democrat Party.
One of us does not get it.
He was ALSO saying that it is and has been the stock in trade among black comedians and that if such talk is forbidden/allowed to one set it should also be forbidden/allowed for the other.
Speech can't be free only in this instance, but not in that instance, and never, never, in the instance over there.....
My next step from there is that it is idiotic to legislate some speech unless you are willing to legislate ALL speech.
I'm constantly amazed at the fact that imus has an audience at all. Then I remember that his record is about 95% hostile only to the right - his sin this time was to step outside of his safe zone and he is paying for it today.
.....how much he pays is still to be determined.
As to the remarks, they were stupid and uncalled for. But, like hillary, maybe he thought he could mimic the segment of audience he thought he was addressing. And, like hillary, he guessed wrong.
PS: "ho" and "nappy headed" are part of the vernacular thanks to black entertainers, many of whom are notably more wealthy than radio-left's ersatz cowboy.
You're right. That bugs me as much as the comment itself.
The guy's stand up I find very funny. His views are unique and can come across as a little harsh to some folks. To paraphrase:
I don't care what you say about me, I have my own opinion of me.
I like it. Some people find it harsh. I find it honest.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.