Imus Remarks

[Kizzo 0]

The only reason "white america" is upset about this Imus situation.. is the fact that a "white man" got put in his place for calling an innocent black basketball team "nappy headed hos".

 

Which is a damn shame.

[Guest Eagle Man]

We all know a nappy haired black person as well.

Listen, knuckle-dragger: if you can't tell the difference between "haha, some white people are awkward when they dance" and "those are some hardcore nappy-headed hos, those jigaboos look like a bunch of men," I don't know what to tell you.

 

 

The only reason "white america" is upset about this Imus situation.. is the fact that a "white man" got put in his place for calling an innocent black basketball team "nappy headed hos".

 

Which is a damn shame.

I'd also venture to say that people are upset by Sharpton and Olbermann publicly organizing their hit lists from the left, and now Delay and Hannity organizing theirs from the right, and whipping up some pathetic tit-for-tat censorship-through-activism volley in which people will feign deep suffering and offense just to get hosts they don't like taken off the air. "We're gonna get Rosie!" "We're gonna get Beck!" Ridiculous.

[haVoc 0]

Innocent? Someone on that Rutgers team has 50 Cent, Eminem and other Rap artist disgracing women on their Ipods.

[Mr. S£im Citrus 0]

Cite?

[Brett Favre 0]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...1001310_pf.html

 

I agree with this guy. The reason i'm posting up his article is because he spoke intelligently about this issue on NY1 News.

 

And this was too funny not to be posted.

 

[Guest Queen Leelee]

I'd rather it be the end of razateca.

I concur.

[treble 0]

We all know a nappy haired black person as well.

Now we've lost Köp och Sälj Gratis.

[dh86 0]

Innocent? Someone on that Rutgers team has 50 Cent, Eminem and other Rap artist disgracing women on their Ipods.

 

really?

[dh86 0]

As soon as the story started picking up steam, I knew it would be a matter of time before the subject would change and the tables would turn. Now all I hear is "the rappers call black women hoes, why cant Imus?" Theres the obvious reasons that theres a difference (Imus using public airwaves to express his views, worked for 2 major conglomerates that relies on ad space) but what does the two situations have to do with each other? I condemn most rap and yes feel that it needs to be cleaned up. Yes, Imus has the freedom to say whatever he wants. With that there are consequences and the public airwaves needed to be cleaned up of people like Don. So where does the two subjects interject?

[the max 0]

As soon as the story started picking up steam, I knew it would be a matter of time before the subject would change and the tables would turn. Now all I hear is "the rappers call black women hoes, why cant Imus?" Theres the obvious reasons that theres a difference (Imus using public airwaves to express his views, worked for 2 major conglomerates that relies on ad space) but what does the two situations have to do with each other? I condemn most rap and yes feel that it needs to be cleaned up. Yes, Imus has the freedom to say whatever he wants. With that there are consequences and the public airwaves needed to be cleaned up of people like Don. So where does the two subjects interject?

 

Sharpton and Jackson use their mob tactics to get Imus removed from the airwaves but do little to nothing about the blatant sexism and endorsement of the "gangster" lifestyle that has a much larger effect on the children. Instead of fighting the larger, and most would argue more important fight gripping their community, Sharpton and Jackson would rather take the easy fight and go after a 66 year old man who made a poor attempt at humor on his comedy show. Did getting the mean white man removed from the airwaves help anything? Is the black youth safer now than it was before this stupid firestorm? If "yes", how? There was no threat.

 

And saying that the public airwaves needed to be "cleaned up" isn't any of Sharpton and Jackson's business. There was no FCC violation. Imus didn't go o the air and scream "Nigger!" or "Fuck!" or anything to violate the FCC's already strict guideline. As far as the public airwaves, Imus was already clean. People may have disagreed with his joke, people may have been offended by the joke, fine. That all should have been taken care of when Imus apologized. He didn't harm any of those players.

 

This whole thing is a first amendment issue. Imus has the right to say what he wants, yes. Sharpton and Jackson have the right to be offended and protest Imus's comments, yes. They DO NOT have the right to use mob tactics to remove Imus because of something he said, no matter how much they may disagree or not like what he said. That matter should have been left up to MSNBC/CBS. The fact that nothing had been done about it for a few days until Sharpton and Jackson really started raising a stink about it tells me that MSNBC and CBS would have kept Imus and let him run out the rest of his contract. The fact that Sharpton has said that Imus is only the beginning of this fight, that all shows will be monitored and basically insinuating that any show that makes comments that Sharpton and Jackson don't like/agree with/whatever, will be treated in the same way...well, I don't want to say it, but it sounds an awful lot like racial censorship.

[dh86 0]

As soon as the story started picking up steam, I knew it would be a matter of time before the subject would change and the tables would turn. Now all I hear is "the rappers call black women hoes, why cant Imus?" Theres the obvious reasons that theres a difference (Imus using public airwaves to express his views, worked for 2 major conglomerates that relies on ad space) but what does the two situations have to do with each other? I condemn most rap and yes feel that it needs to be cleaned up. Yes, Imus has the freedom to say whatever he wants. With that there are consequences and the public airwaves needed to be cleaned up of people like Don. So where does the two subjects interject?

 

Sharpton and Jackson use their mob tactics to get Imus removed from the airwaves but do little to nothing about the blatant sexism and endorsement of the "gangster" lifestyle that has a much larger effect on the children. Instead of fighting the larger, and most would argue more important fight gripping their community, Sharpton and Jackson would rather take the easy fight and go after a 66 year old man who made a poor attempt at humor on his comedy show. Did getting the mean white man removed from the airwaves help anything? Is the black youth safer now than it was before this stupid firestorm? If "yes", how? There was no threat.

 

And saying that the public airwaves needed to be "cleaned up" isn't any of Sharpton and Jackson's business. There was no FCC violation. Imus didn't go o the air and scream "Nigger!" or "Fuck!" or anything to violate the FCC's already strict guideline. As far as the public airwaves, Imus was already clean. People may have disagreed with his joke, people may have been offended by the joke, fine. That all should have been taken care of when Imus apologized. He didn't harm any of those players.

 

This whole thing is a first amendment issue. Imus has the right to say what he wants, yes. Sharpton and Jackson have the right to be offended and protest Imus's comments, yes. They DO NOT have the right to use mob tactics to remove Imus because of something he said, no matter how much they may disagree or not like what he said. That matter should have been left up to MSNBC/CBS. The fact that nothing had been done about it for a few days until Sharpton and Jackson really started raising a stink about it tells me that MSNBC and CBS would have kept Imus and let him run out the rest of his contract. The fact that Sharpton has said that Imus is only the beginning of this fight, that all shows will be monitored and basically insinuating that any show that makes comments that Sharpton and Jackson don't like/agree with/whatever, will be treated in the same way...well, I don't want to say it, but it sounds an awful lot like racial censorship.

Threatening a boycott of a radio/tv show does not entail a mob tactic. It is the most effective way to get a program off the air. You say fighting the blantant sexism and endorsement of gangstas are fights Jackson and Sharpton should be fighting and I could agree with that. Then the next paragraph you state that the public airwaves are "none of their business". Is it only their business when it is hip hop involved? When I hear hip hop on public airwaves it is heavily censored. Now, Jackson and Sharpton should go after the music industry starting with the music groups that releases the songs. But that is inequivalent to a racist and sexist remark against a specific group of individuals. It is not a First Amendment issue to you. If it were a First Amendment issue to you then you would also be defending the rights of Jackson and Sharpton to petition and protest as they see fit. That falls under freedom of speech as well correct? General Motors,Sprint,American Express,Staples,etc are all in the customer service field. They have the right not to have their product affiliated with Don Imus. MSNBC/CBS has the rights to protect their ad revenue that keep their stations on the air. Don Imus can definitely say whatever he likes. He is not being prosecuted by the government. When there are many other factors involved as there are,there must be consequences. Everyone involved are well within their rights in this situation.

[Superfly Snuka 0]

As soon as the story started picking up steam, I knew it would be a matter of time before the subject would change and the tables would turn. Now all I hear is "the rappers call black women hoes, why cant Imus?" Theres the obvious reasons that theres a difference (Imus using public airwaves to express his views, worked for 2 major conglomerates that relies on ad space) but what does the two situations have to do with each other? I condemn most rap and yes feel that it needs to be cleaned up. Yes, Imus has the freedom to say whatever he wants. With that there are consequences and the public airwaves needed to be cleaned up of people like Don. So where does the two subjects interject?

 

Sharpton and Jackson use their mob tactics to get Imus removed from the airwaves but do little to nothing about the blatant sexism and endorsement of the "gangster" lifestyle that has a much larger effect on the children. Instead of fighting the larger, and most would argue more important fight gripping their community, Sharpton and Jackson would rather take the easy fight and go after a 66 year old man who made a poor attempt at humor on his comedy show. Did getting the mean white man removed from the airwaves help anything? Is the black youth safer now than it was before this stupid firestorm? If "yes", how? There was no threat.

 

And saying that the public airwaves needed to be "cleaned up" isn't any of Sharpton and Jackson's business. There was no FCC violation. Imus didn't go o the air and scream "Nigger!" or "Fuck!" or anything to violate the FCC's already strict guideline. As far as the public airwaves, Imus was already clean. People may have disagreed with his joke, people may have been offended by the joke, fine. That all should have been taken care of when Imus apologized. He didn't harm any of those players.

 

This whole thing is a first amendment issue. Imus has the right to say what he wants, yes. Sharpton and Jackson have the right to be offended and protest Imus's comments, yes. They DO NOT have the right to use mob tactics to remove Imus because of something he said, no matter how much they may disagree or not like what he said. That matter should have been left up to MSNBC/CBS. The fact that nothing had been done about it for a few days until Sharpton and Jackson really started raising a stink about it tells me that MSNBC and CBS would have kept Imus and let him run out the rest of his contract. The fact that Sharpton has said that Imus is only the beginning of this fight, that all shows will be monitored and basically insinuating that any show that makes comments that Sharpton and Jackson don't like/agree with/whatever, will be treated in the same way...well, I don't want to say it, but it sounds an awful lot like racial censorship.

Threatening a boycott of a radio/tv show does not entail a mob tactic. It is the most effective way to get a program off the air. You say fighting the blantant sexism and endorsement of gangstas are fights Jackson and Sharpton should be fighting and I could agree with that. Then the next paragraph you state that the public airwaves are "none of their business". Is it only their business when it is hip hop involved? When I hear hip hop on public airwaves it is heavily censored. Now, Jackson and Sharpton should go after the music industry starting with the music groups that releases the songs. But that is inequivalent to a racist and sexist remark against a specific group of individuals. It is not a First Amendment issue to you. If it were a First Amendment issue to you then you would also be defending the rights of Jackson and Sharpton to petition and protest as they see fit. That falls under freedom of speech as well correct? General Motors,Sprint,American Express,Staples,etc are all in the customer service field. They have the right not to have their product affiliated with Don Imus. MSNBC/CBS has the rights to protect their ad revenue that keep their stations on the air. Don Imus can definitely say whatever he likes. He is not being prosecuted by the government. When there are many other factors involved as there are,there must be consequences. Everyone involved are well within their rights in this situation.

 

Why doesn't Sharpton/Jackson protest/ start boycotts of Music record labels that have artists with racist/sexist comments (including gangsta rap). They (record labels) are as much of a conglomerate as CBS or MSNBC, no? There is a ton of rap music (by blacks and whites), for example, that is directed at specific individuals/groups.

 

I wish there would be better representatives/leaders, in regards to the "public face", of the black community than Sharpton (and to a lesser degree Jackson, who was an important leader in 60s and 70s, but has turned into an awful caricature now). I do find it peculiar how these guys are "reverends", but never express forgiveness, even after their goals (such as getting imus fired) are achieved (of course, reverends shouldn't have to come clean about an affair b/c the tabloids are going to go public either, but i digress). It is interesting how Sharpton has not retracted his comments about the Duke rape case that initially helped fuel the flames without evidence, despite those guys being exonerated. Both of these guys, as well, as many a time made ethnic/racist comments about Jews in particular that are just as, or more so, offensive (and also homosexuals and whites). Sharpton is a snake (and Imus is a dumb ass).

[the max 0]

Threatening a boycott of a radio/tv show does not entail a mob tactic. It is the most effective way to get a program off the air.

 

Threatening sponsors is a mob tactic. Threatening the employing companies is as well. And it is nowhere within S&J's rights to get Imus removed from the air. They have the right to protest, petition and raise holy hell. But once they start getting shows removed on the grounds of them not agreeing with/liking what is said on the show, it becomes censorship.

 

You say fighting the blantant sexism and endorsement of gangstas are fights Jackson and Sharpton should be fighting and I could agree with that. Then the next paragraph you state that the public airwaves are "none of their business". Is it only their business when it is hip hop involved? When I hear hip hop on public airwaves it is heavily censored.

 

Censored based on the FCC. Not S&J. The FCC dictates what is and isn't allowed on public airwaves. Not S&J. S&J should be concerned with the artists and record companies who are allowing those lyrics in that music to go unchecked.

 

Now, Jackson and Sharpton should go after the music industry starting with the music groups that releases the songs. But that is inequivalent to a racist and sexist remark against a specific group of individuals.

 

It is? How? These artists in hip hop are in the same community that S&J are trying to protect, yet their actions and words are bringing it down from the inside. If S&J were truly fighting the same fight as they did against Imus, they'd be calling for sponsors to stop backing hip hop artists, they'd be calling for labels to drop them on the grounds of being sexist and hateful, etc. Yet they don't.

 

It is not a First Amendment issue to you. If it were a First Amendment issue to you then you would also be defending the rights of Jackson and Sharpton to petition and protest as they see fit.

 

I don't have a problem with them petitioning and protesting the I-Man. What I have a problem with is them using whatever influence that they have to censor what is on the public airwaves. Again, Imus committed no FCC violation. Disagree with what he said, protest what he said, whatever. What he said was perfectly within the guidelines of the ridiculously strict FCC. S&J bullied sponsors and used influences with Imus' bosses to have him removed from the air for saying something that they didn't like. THAT is not the first amendment. That's censorship.

 

That falls under freedom of speech as well correct? General Motors,Sprint,American Express,Staples,etc are all in the customer service field. They have the right not to have their product affiliated with Don Imus.

 

And yet, until S&J raised a stink about what Imus said (about two days after he said it) those same sponsors weren't pulling out. Hey, they can do whatever they want. But it wasn't until S&J got a hold of them that they started backing off. I vehemently disagree with those sponsors for kowtowing to two men who do not speak for a majority of their own population, but that's neither here nor there.

 

MSNBC/CBS has the rights to protect their ad revenue that keep their stations on the air.

 

And yet, again, neither company had taken any action towards the I-Man for his comments until S&J told them that the comment was offensive. Again, I completely disagree with both company's actions. They could have stood by Imus, a twenty year veteran of CBS, but instead buckled under pressure from a stupid interest group that by and large holds as much power as it is given by fearful white men.

 

Don Imus can definitely say whatever he likes. He is not being prosecuted by the government. When there are many other factors involved as there are,there must be consequences. Everyone involved are well within their rights in this situation.

 

I never said he was being PERsecuted by the government. My issue is that he had a right given to him by the government taken away by two selfish blowhards who are too scared to fight the fight within their own race. They made Imus the scapegoat for their inability to police their own race. And instead of accepting Imus's legitimate (I feel) apology, they attacked the sponsors of his show and had the show removed from the air. That to me is the most ridiculous thing in all of this. They censored Imus for a stupid, unfunny joke.

[The Niggardly King 0]

Jesus Christ, I thought thee Anna Nicole Smith shit was horrendous... this just takes the cake.

[the max 0]

Jesus Christ, I thought thee Anna Nicole Smith shit was horrendous... this just takes the cake.

 

Let's see:

 

Untalented bimbo that married a 90 year old and died of a drug overdose

 

VERSUS

 

White man being censored by unforgiving black reverends with threats of more censorship to come

[dh86 0]

As soon as the story started picking up steam, I knew it would be a matter of time before the subject would change and the tables would turn. Now all I hear is "the rappers call black women hoes, why cant Imus?" Theres the obvious reasons that theres a difference (Imus using public airwaves to express his views, worked for 2 major conglomerates that relies on ad space) but what does the two situations have to do with each other? I condemn most rap and yes feel that it needs to be cleaned up. Yes, Imus has the freedom to say whatever he wants. With that there are consequences and the public airwaves needed to be cleaned up of people like Don. So where does the two subjects interject?

 

Sharpton and Jackson use their mob tactics to get Imus removed from the airwaves but do little to nothing about the blatant sexism and endorsement of the "gangster" lifestyle that has a much larger effect on the children. Instead of fighting the larger, and most would argue more important fight gripping their community, Sharpton and Jackson would rather take the easy fight and go after a 66 year old man who made a poor attempt at humor on his comedy show. Did getting the mean white man removed from the airwaves help anything? Is the black youth safer now than it was before this stupid firestorm? If "yes", how? There was no threat.

 

And saying that the public airwaves needed to be "cleaned up" isn't any of Sharpton and Jackson's business. There was no FCC violation. Imus didn't go o the air and scream "Nigger!" or "Fuck!" or anything to violate the FCC's already strict guideline. As far as the public airwaves, Imus was already clean. People may have disagreed with his joke, people may have been offended by the joke, fine. That all should have been taken care of when Imus apologized. He didn't harm any of those players.

 

This whole thing is a first amendment issue. Imus has the right to say what he wants, yes. Sharpton and Jackson have the right to be offended and protest Imus's comments, yes. They DO NOT have the right to use mob tactics to remove Imus because of something he said, no matter how much they may disagree or not like what he said. That matter should have been left up to MSNBC/CBS. The fact that nothing had been done about it for a few days until Sharpton and Jackson really started raising a stink about it tells me that MSNBC and CBS would have kept Imus and let him run out the rest of his contract. The fact that Sharpton has said that Imus is only the beginning of this fight, that all shows will be monitored and basically insinuating that any show that makes comments that Sharpton and Jackson don't like/agree with/whatever, will be treated in the same way...well, I don't want to say it, but it sounds an awful lot like racial censorship.

Threatening a boycott of a radio/tv show does not entail a mob tactic. It is the most effective way to get a program off the air. You say fighting the blantant sexism and endorsement of gangstas are fights Jackson and Sharpton should be fighting and I could agree with that. Then the next paragraph you state that the public airwaves are "none of their business". Is it only their business when it is hip hop involved? When I hear hip hop on public airwaves it is heavily censored. Now, Jackson and Sharpton should go after the music industry starting with the music groups that releases the songs. But that is inequivalent to a racist and sexist remark against a specific group of individuals. It is not a First Amendment issue to you. If it were a First Amendment issue to you then you would also be defending the rights of Jackson and Sharpton to petition and protest as they see fit. That falls under freedom of speech as well correct? General Motors,Sprint,American Express,Staples,etc are all in the customer service field. They have the right not to have their product affiliated with Don Imus. MSNBC/CBS has the rights to protect their ad revenue that keep their stations on the air. Don Imus can definitely say whatever he likes. He is not being prosecuted by the government. When there are many other factors involved as there are,there must be consequences. Everyone involved are well within their rights in this situation.

 

Why doesn't Sharpton/Jackson protest/ start boycotts of Music record labels that have artists with racist/sexist comments (including gangsta rap). They (record labels) are as much of a conglomerate as CBS or MSNBC, no? There is a ton of rap music (by blacks and whites), for example, that is directed at specific individuals/groups.

 

I wish there would be better representatives/leaders, in regards to the "public face", of the black community than Sharpton (and to a lesser degree Jackson). I do find it peculiar how these guys are "reverends", but never express forgiveness, even after their goals (such as getting imus fired) are achieved (of course, reverends shouldn't have to come clean about an affair b/c the tabloids are going to go public either, but i digress). It is interesting how Sharpton has not retracted his comments about the Duke rape case that initially helped fuel the flames without evidence, despite those guys being exonerated.

I dont know why they dont protest the music groups honestly. I believe C Dolores Tucker had the right idea in mind a decade ago. You dont know how badly I would want new leaders to emerge and lead our community. Sharpton and Jackson have some skeletons in their past and things they have been dead wrong about. Attacking the messengers, however, is cheap. All of that has very little to do with the matter at hand. Everybody's human and everyone makes mistakes. When Jesse Jackson had fuck ups ,guess what, there were consequences for his actions. Don Imus made a genuine mistake in expressing the beliefs he had on the air. I believe hes sorry but theres consequences for his actions.

[justsoyouknow 0]

Jesus Christ, I thought thee Anna Nicole Smith shit was horrendous... this just takes the cake.

 

Let's see:

 

Untalented bimbo that married a 90 year old and died of a drug overdose

 

VERSUS

 

White man being censored by unforgiving black reverends with threats of more censorship to come

 

 

You forgot about who the daddy was. This is all so pointless, everyone getting worked up over this.

[Guest Eagle Man]

It's really not a 1st amendment issue, guys. The government isn't censoring anyone here. This just relates to special interest groups.

 

the public airwaves needed to be cleaned up of people like Don.

See, this is kind of scary. Did they? I found Imus's show to be horrible radio and television, because he's a haggard mumbling crank who says stupid shit when it's actually intelligible, but this crusading to take him off the air is silly. I was for removing Don Imus from the air because I hate his show (my dad and I fight about the merits of the show), but now that this is a harbinger of what's to come in broadcasting, I'm starting to see it from a better perspective, and I don't like what's in store. What he said was flagrantly offensive, but this should've been handled much better by CBS. Don't let him go on Sharpton's show, just play it close to the vest, say "he'll be dealt with," and deal with him. But since you're the expert, who else needs to be purged from the air? Anyone else we don't like? Sean Hannity is a troglodyte, so it's a good thing I don't listen to his talk show. But should we make sure that nobody even has the option to decline listening to it? I was hoping that Jesse was done with shakedowns after he made Anheuser-Busch toss a few distributors his sons' way.

 

Don't get me started on "the public airwaves," either. The FCC has outlived its usefulness beyond making sure nobody's broadcasting at 700 kHz past sunset outside of Cincinnati.

[dh86 0]

Threatening sponsors is a mob tactic. Threatening the employing companies is as well. And it is nowhere within S&J's rights to get Imus removed from the air. They have the right to protest, petition and raise holy hell. But once they start getting shows removed on the grounds of them not agreeing with/liking what is said on the show, it becomes censorship.

 

Basically you are saying they can protest all they want but if it becomes a success they are censoring Don? If you are saying their protests shouldnt be allowed to be a success, then you shouldnt think they have the right at all. This is not censorship. It is not Don Imus' RIGHT to broadcast over CBS/NBC airwaves. The companies went into business for themselves and did what was right by them.

 

 

Censored based on the FCC. Not S&J. The FCC dictates what is and isn't allowed on public airwaves. Not S&J. S&J should be concerned with the artists and record companies who are allowing those lyrics in that music to go unchecked.

 

Who the hell are you to pick and choose their battles for them? The lyrics in 'that music'. Huh? Anyway, the FCC does dictate what is decent as does the networks that carried his program.

 

 

It is? How? These artists in hip hop are in the same community that S&J are trying to protect, yet their actions and words are bringing it down from the inside. If S&J were truly fighting the same fight as they did against Imus, they'd be calling for sponsors to stop backing hip hop artists, they'd be calling for labels to drop them on the grounds of being sexist and hateful, etc. Yet they don't.

 

What concern do you have for the black community? I would not guess very much. The seperate battles "S&J" may or may not fight have zero to do with Don Imus and his words. If you are so concerned about the degradation of the black community, then make another thread about it.

 

 

I don't have a problem with them petitioning and protesting the I-Man. What I have a problem with is them using whatever influence that they have to censor what is on the public airwaves. Again, Imus committed no FCC violation. Disagree with what he said, protest what he said, whatever. What he said was perfectly within the guidelines of the ridiculously strict FCC. S&J bullied sponsors and used influences with Imus' bosses to have him removed from the air for saying something that they didn't like. THAT is not the first amendment. That's censorship.

 

Its called protesting what they, and many others, perceive a wrong. Read a history book.

 

And yet, until S&J raised a stink about what Imus said (about two days after he said it) those same sponsors weren't pulling out. Hey, they can do whatever they want. But it wasn't until S&J got a hold of them that they started backing off. I vehemently disagree with those sponsors for kowtowing to two men who do not speak for a majority of their own population, but that's neither here nor there.

 

Under the First Amendment rights we have, they are allowed to raise a stink. If General Motors and Proctor and Gamble didnt want to fight S&J, why are you not blaming the companies for wanting to keep their full consumer base?

 

And yet, again, neither company had taken any action towards the I-Man for his comments until S&J told them that the comment was offensive. Again, I completely disagree with both company's actions. They could have stood by Imus, a twenty year veteran of CBS, but instead buckled under pressure from a stupid interest group that by and large holds as much power as it is given by fearful white men.

 

CBS and NBC has the right to make money. They had to consider what was more important. Their sponsors or Don Imus. It was a very easy decision if I say so myself.

 

 

I never said he was being PERsecuted by the government. My issue is that he had a right given to him by the government taken away by two selfish blowhards who are too scared to fight the fight within their own race. They made Imus the scapegoat for their inability to police their own race. And instead of accepting Imus's legitimate (I feel) apology, they attacked the sponsors of his show and had the show removed from the air. That to me is the most ridiculous thing in all of this. They censored Imus for a stupid, unfunny joke.

 

A right taken away by Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton??? What news organization do they own? Don Imus can buy a radio station and broadcast his views 24 hours a day if he likes. Don Imus is nobodies scapegoat or patsy. Al Sharpton had Don on his radio show and I believe he was getting ready to forgive until Don attacked him and my congresswoman. Even if he did forgive Don like I already forgive him, there are still consequences for every action. Don will land on his feet and get a second chance if he so choose. Now if you,max want to discuss the merits of Jesse Jackson policing all blacks as we are monothlic in our actions. Or are too scared to stop the infighting in the black race. Please take that to another thread and I would be glad to discuss that with you.

[dh86 0]

Jesus Christ, I thought thee Anna Nicole Smith shit was horrendous... this just takes the cake.

 

Let's see:

 

Untalented bimbo that married a 90 year old and died of a drug overdose

 

VERSUS

 

White man being censored by unforgiving black reverends with threats of more censorship to come

if its censorship it is white man censoring white man

 

Jeff Tucker of NBC=white

Jean-Bernard Lévy of Vivendi Universal=white

Jeffrey R. Immelt of General Electric=white

Barry Diller=white

Bill Gates of Microsoft=white

Leslie Moonves of CBS=white

Summer Redstone of Viacom=white

[Guest Eagle Man]

Okay, pat on the back for googling all those white people's names, but I don't think any of them had a say in this. Wasn't this just Joel Hollander's call to make? This has nothing to do with Sumner Redstone and Bill Gates, nor are the shakedown men directly censoring anybody. It's CBS Radio cutting ties with someone who has become a liability. That's fine. I'm worried about where it goes from here.

[dh86 0]

Okay, pat on the back for googling all those white people's names, but I don't think any of them had a say in this. Wasn't this just Joel Hollander's call to make? This has nothing to do with Sumner Redstone and Bill Gates, nor are the shakedown men directly censoring anybody. It's CBS Radio cutting ties with someone who has become a liability. That's fine. I'm worried about where it goes from here.

 

My point is that no one was being censored and if Imus were then it was his white bosses at CBS and MSNBC as I named. From here, I hope that hate comments are no longer tolerated on airwaves from every direction. I sincerely hope that it is the lasting stamp that all of these hub bub leaves.

[BUTT 0]

Raz thinks the dude's name is Bill Crosby.

[Guest Eagle Man]

He kicked the shit out of Theo!

[Mike wanna be 0]

S&J are allowed to protest. They're allowed to speak their minds on the issue as much as Imus was allowed to say what he did.

 

Did a single sponsor back out before S&J raised a stink about it? No. In fact it seems like each and every party involved took every step possible between "Let's ignore it, he apologized" and "We want no further affiliation with Don Imus" (most easily evidenced by the do nothing-2 week suspension-MSNBC cancelled simulcast-CBS firing line in the broadcasting department) and it just was not good enough for them until he lost his job. Make no mistake; while it wasn't S&J that handed him the pink slip, they're the ones that signed off on it.

 

On a related note, what a classy job the Rutgers team did to finally accept his apology...once there was no life left in the story for them to milk for TV time. Convenient, is it not, that as soon as Imus stops being a personality and becomes an out-of-work 66-year-old with nothing left to give to them, that they then decide his apology counts.

[Guest Eagle Man]

S&J are allowed to protest. They're allowed to speak their minds on the issue as much as Imus was allowed to say what he did.

Sure, they're allowed to, but man, don't you just wish someone would take those two out already?

[Gary Floyd 0]

I don't have much to say except Cena's Writer's sig rules. I fucking loved Grindhouse.

 

He kicked the shit out of Theo!

What would Eddie Winslow Do?

[Guest Eagle Man]

Man, what the fuck would I do to you for talkin' about me like that, bitch? Your name is Gary Floyd? More like Gay Boy, cuz all you do is suck cock for free. You love suckin' cock with all the big black-ass niggas you're afraid to bring home to mom. If you ever try suckin' my big black dick I rip your jaw off motherfucker. You like Cabaret Voltaire? You like that gay-ass French techno music when you're out gettin' fucked up yo azz. You gonna get AIDS bitch unless you play it safe when you suck all that fag sausage. Motherfucker I'ma kick yo azz so hard you be seein' stars all up in this bitch. Bitch you're a faggot-ass piece of shit and you gonna die. Yeah that's right gay ass honky boy cocksuckin' muthafucka I'ma run you down in mah escalade. bring it bitch.

[The Niggardly King 0]

YES

[Edwin MacPhisto 0]

White people are still really scared of black people, aren't they.