PDA

View Full Version : Imus - when will Sharpton apologize to Duke players?


samsung101
Apr 12th, 2007, 03:09 PM
Don Imus, whose tv radio show was cancelled by MSNBC yesterday,
asked when Al Sharpton will apologize to the Duke lacrosse players?

The answer is fairly simple - never.

Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson and the Duke DA fueled a
controversy, what turned out to be a fake charge - and ruined
the lives of these young men. They uttered every racist angle
they could.

It was all a lie.

When will these young men get an apology? Never.


Which begs the question, who made Al Sharpton the moral
compass of the airwaves?

No one.

There is no doubt, this is all about the left removing the voices they
don't want on the air, those that disagree with them, controverisal
or not. Will we hold up the same criteria for the voices on the left,
on hip hop stations, on spanish language stations, on AM talk radio,
FM talk radio, rock hosts, PBS, etc? I doubt it.




MSNBC in the wake of corporate contract cancellations 1 week after
the Imus words cancelled his tv broadcast of his radio show. Without
that, the radio show on CBS is on the last leg. He is older, his ratings
have sunk in recent years just to sheer age and time - he's been on
the air for nearly 30 years.

MSNBC tried to say it was inside company/fellow news personnel
feedback that led to the cancellation.

Uh, no. Imus is a jerk. Off the air, he is the guy is he on the air-
cranky, full of himself, hot air, and blow up. Not well liked. That's
what made him a multi-millionaire, and made MSNBC and CBS millions
in revenue. A guy many were happy to see get his, fired.

Still doesn't make it right. The man apologized, he groveled, he
will meet with the team. Which is very, very, very big of the team.

Let it play out. But, MSNBC caved. Now, Keith Olberman can be the
#1 guy on the low rated MSNBC cable network!

samsung101
Apr 12th, 2007, 03:13 PM
Rosie is crazy, a loon of the left...but, she is quoted with a good point.

It is about free speech.

Offensive and ugly and racist speech is sadly, free speech.

I don't like flags being burned. But, I don't want it oulawed.

I don't like rap music. But, I don't want that censored.

I don't care for Air America, but, it should be on the air.

I don't like what Imus said, but, he shouldn't lose his show
because of an error - especially, when he is being over backwards
to apologize and make amends any way he can.

It's about the 'thought police'. We should fear the idea of the
thought police, Al Sharpton's thought police squad.

It isn't the FCC pushing this, though now the FCC is investigating it
as an afterthought.

It's high profile individuals.



The govt. isn't doing this.

A few key political and social figures are pushing this, and
forcing companies to fire people because they pushed
the envelope.

Yet, the same companies promote and sell and spread music
and lyrics of rappers and writers that use far more offensive
language as 'entertainment', and reach far more people than
Imus ever did on his best day in radio and tv.

samsung101
Apr 12th, 2007, 05:17 PM
When he apologizes to Steven Pagone.
When he personally pays Pagone for the
defamation claim he won in court.
Sharpton backers paid it for him.



Never..........

Rocketta
Apr 12th, 2007, 05:44 PM
I say you should picket Sharpton's job....call for his resignation. Imus and you should go right to the founder of the organization and tell them to let Al go. :tape: Oh and do the same for Jesse. That'll show him oh and that will somehow minimize the foul shit that came out of Imus' mouth.! I'm sure Al & Jesse would say, "If you feel froggy, then leap!" :shrug:

kiwifan
Apr 12th, 2007, 05:51 PM
What did Sharpton call them?

Quotes please. :p

And for the record I've never liked Al Sharpton...just curious as to when he called the Duke Lax team something similar to "nappy headed hos"; out of the blue completely unsolicited just because he felt like it that day? :devil:

Rocketta
Apr 12th, 2007, 05:57 PM
What did Sharpton call them?

Quotes please. :p

And for the record I've never liked Al Sharpton...just curious as to when he called the Duke Lax team something similar to "nappy headed hos"; out of the blue completely unsolicited just because he felt like it that day? :devil:

don't you mean out of the blue unsolicited because they were successful. Oh wait, young women making it to the championship game and doing themselves proud is the equivilant to a bunch of spoiled rich bratty atheletes that thought they were above the law and could conduct some :bs: code of silence when questioned who throw loud unruly parties. :rolleyes:

miffedmax
Apr 12th, 2007, 06:11 PM
I think Sharpton does owe them an apology and a retraction of how he characterized the Duke players.

As do a lot of other people, male and female, white and black.

Why single out Al?

I mean, my personal feeling is that the man basically never met a camera he didn't like and he'd probably show up and picket my house if he thought I laughed too hard at Dave Chappelle's Tyrone character if he thought it would get him on TV, but he was hardly the only person to rush to judgement in this case.

It will be interesting to see who, if anyone, apologizes.

miffedmax
Apr 12th, 2007, 06:22 PM
don't you mean out of the blue unsolicited because they were successful. Oh wait, young women making it to the championship game and doing themselves proud is the equivilant to a bunch of spoiled rich bratty atheletes that thought they were above the law and could conduct some :bs: code of silence when questioned who throw loud unruly parties. :rolleyes:

I was about to raise some of these same points in my post--it's hard to occupy the high ground when you're throwing parties, getting drunk and bringing in strippers.

I'll admit I've done my share of drinking, some of it in strip clubs. But even in strip clubs and a parties where alcohol is served there are still limits.

Malin
Apr 12th, 2007, 06:47 PM
Don Imus, whose tv radio show was cancelled by MSNBC yesterday,
asked when Al Sharpton will apologize to the Duke lacrosse players?

The answer is fairly simple - never.

Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson and the Duke DA fueled a
controversy, what turned out to be a fake charge - and ruined
the lives of these young men. They uttered every racist angle
they could.

It was all a lie.

When will these young men get an apology? Never.

Which begs the question, who made Al Sharpton the moral
compass of the airwaves?

No one.

There is no doubt, this is all about the left removing the voices they
don't want on the air, those that disagree with them, controverisal
or not. Will we hold up the same criteria for the voices on the left,
on hip hop stations, on spanish language stations, on AM talk radio,
FM talk radio, rock hosts, PBS, etc? I doubt it.




MSNBC in the wake of corporate contract cancellations 1 week after
the Imus words cancelled his tv broadcast of his radio show. Without
that, the radio show on CBS is on the last leg. He is older, his ratings
have sunk in recent years just to sheer age and time - he's been on
the air for nearly 30 years.

MSNBC tried to say it was inside company/fellow news personnel
feedback that led to the cancellation.

Uh, no. Imus is a jerk. Off the air, he is the guy is he on the air-
cranky, full of himself, hot air, and blow up. Not well liked. That's
what made him a multi-millionaire, and made MSNBC and CBS millions
in revenue. A guy many were happy to see get his, fired.

Still doesn't make it right. The man apologized, he groveled, he
will meet with the team. Which is very, very, very big of the team.

Let it play out. But, MSNBC caved. Now, Keith Olberman can be the
#1 guy on the low rated MSNBC cable network!



:worship: :worship: :worship: :clap2: :clap2: :clap2: so true, such a double standard

mykarma
Apr 12th, 2007, 07:15 PM
I think Sharpton does owe them an apology and a retraction of how he characterized the Duke players.

As do a lot of other people, male and female, white and black.

Why single out Al?

I mean, my personal feeling is that the man basically never met a camera he didn't like and he'd probably show up and picket my house if he thought I laughed too hard at Dave Chappelle's Tyrone character if he thought it would get him on TV, but he was hardly the only person to rush to judgement in this case.

It will be interesting to see who, if anyone, apologizes.
I guess now that people are responding to this thread, Samsung can stop answering her own questions. Anyhow, if anyone owes them an apology it's the Durham DA. Al Sharpton doesn't owe them shit. Like Al or not, if it wasn't for Al the murder of the "would be groom" and his friends would have gone unnoticed or at least swept under the rug. If it wasn't for Al, when the guy from Africa that was murdered by the police in cold blood, would have been kept quiet, and lastly what about the Haitian male that was tormented and brutalized by New York's finest? If not for the support of Al, he wouldn't have been able to sue the NY police dept. Like him or not, he's there when no one else is. Like Rocketta said, if they don't like Rev. Al, go picket his office.

BTW, this post is not about you.

mykarma
Apr 12th, 2007, 07:19 PM
Don Imus, whose tv radio show was cancelled by MSNBC yesterday,
asked when Al Sharpton will apologize to the Duke lacrosse players?

The answer is fairly simple - never.

Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson and the Duke DA fueled a
controversy, what turned out to be a fake charge - and ruined
the lives of these young men. They uttered every racist angle
they could.

It was all a lie.

When will these young men get an apology? Never.


Which begs the question, who made Al Sharpton the moral
compass of the airwaves?

No one.

There is no doubt, this is all about the left removing the voices they
don't want on the air, those that disagree with them, controverisal
or not. Will we hold up the same criteria for the voices on the left,
on hip hop stations, on spanish language stations, on AM talk radio,
FM talk radio, rock hosts, PBS, etc? I doubt it.




MSNBC in the wake of corporate contract cancellations 1 week after
the Imus words cancelled his tv broadcast of his radio show. Without
that, the radio show on CBS is on the last leg. He is older, his ratings
have sunk in recent years just to sheer age and time - he's been on
the air for nearly 30 years.

MSNBC tried to say it was inside company/fellow news personnel
feedback that led to the cancellation.

Uh, no. Imus is a jerk. Off the air, he is the guy is he on the air-
cranky, full of himself, hot air, and blow up. Not well liked. That's
what made him a multi-millionaire, and made MSNBC and CBS millions
in revenue. A guy many were happy to see get his, fired.

Still doesn't make it right. The man apologized, he groveled, he
will meet with the team. Which is very, very, very big of the team.

Let it play out. But, MSNBC caved. Now, Keith Olberman can be the
#1 guy on the low rated MSNBC cable network!
:lol::lol::lol::tape:

BigB08822
Apr 12th, 2007, 08:10 PM
I am really upset over what Imus said about the Rutgers basketball team but I do agree with Imus on this one. Al Sharpton loves to take issues and make them into a huge national debate. If he is so willing to put Imus out there for all to see then he should live by the same standards he preaches. He certainly called those Duke players guilty and tried to make it into a race issue. He should certainly apologize, as should Imus and I believe Imus already has.

Mother_Marjorie
Apr 12th, 2007, 08:17 PM
I am really upset over what Imus said about the Rutgers basketball team but I do agree with Imus on this one. Al Sharpton loves to take issues and make them into a huge national debate. If he is so willing to put Imus out there for all to see then he should live by the same standards he preaches. He certainly called those Duke players guilty and tried to make it into a race issue. He should certainly apologize, as should Imus and I believe Imus already has.

http://www.drudgereport.com/

Oh, its far from over.

Al and friends just gave Imus a platform.

*JR*
Apr 12th, 2007, 08:19 PM
I guess now that people are responding to this thread, Samsung can stop answering her own questions. Anyhow, if anyone owes them an apology it's the Durham DA. Al Sharpton doesn't owe them shit. Like Al or not, if it wasn't for Al the murder of the "would be groom" and his friends would have gone unnoticed or at least swept under the rug. If it wasn't for Al, when the guy from Africa that was murdered by the police in cold blood, would have been kept quiet, and lastly what about the Haitian male that was tormented and brutalized by New York's finest? If not for the support of Al, he wouldn't have been able to sue the NY police dept. Like him or not, he's there when no one else is. Like Rocketta said, if they don't like Rev. Al, go picket his office.

Maybe if not for Al, the NYC area would have room for a local civil rights leader without his "baggage" to get a lot of media attention organizing marches against police misconduct, etc. Just a thought.

griffin
Apr 12th, 2007, 08:23 PM
I don't know if you've noticed this, but polite folk tend not to get a lot of media attention.

Unless some ruffian has already stirred things up and they feel like saying "see, if only X were as nice and reasonable as Y here....."

Stamp Paid
Apr 12th, 2007, 08:39 PM
From the looks of this thread, it seems like white people pay more attention to Sharpton than black people do.

mykarma
Apr 12th, 2007, 08:52 PM
Maybe if not for Al, the NYC area would have room for a local civil rights leader without his "baggage" to get a lot of media attention organizing marches against police misconduct, etc. Just a thought.
It has to be someone that is willing to take the heat. Most successful people aren't willing to do that. Anyhow, no one has nominated Al Sharpton as a black leaders except for white people.

RVD
Apr 12th, 2007, 08:53 PM
Don Imus, whose tv radio show was cancelled by MSNBC yesterday,
asked when Al Sharpton will apologize to the Duke lacrosse players?

The answer is fairly simple - never.

Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson and the Duke DA fueled a
controversy, what turned out to be a fake charge - and ruined
the lives of these young men. They uttered every racist angle
they could.

It was all a lie.

When will these young men get an apology? Never.


Which begs the question, who made Al Sharpton the moral
compass of the airwaves?

No one.

There is no doubt, this is all about the left removing the voices they
don't want on the air, those that disagree with them, controverisal
or not. Will we hold up the same criteria for the voices on the left,
on hip hop stations, on spanish language stations, on AM talk radio,
FM talk radio, rock hosts, PBS, etc? I doubt it.




MSNBC in the wake of corporate contract cancellations 1 week after
the Imus words cancelled his tv broadcast of his radio show. Without
that, the radio show on CBS is on the last leg. He is older, his ratings
have sunk in recent years just to sheer age and time - he's been on
the air for nearly 30 years.

MSNBC tried to say it was inside company/fellow news personnel
feedback that led to the cancellation.

Uh, no. Imus is a jerk. Off the air, he is the guy is he on the air-
cranky, full of himself, hot air, and blow up. Not well liked. That's
what made him a multi-millionaire, and made MSNBC and CBS millions
in revenue. A guy many were happy to see get his, fired.

Still doesn't make it right. The man apologized, he groveled, he
will meet with the team. Which is very, very, very big of the team.

Let it play out. But, MSNBC caved. Now, Keith Olberman can be the
#1 guy on the low rated MSNBC cable network!I'm sorry, but I missed the part where the Duke players [the three indicted] were found innocent of any wrongdoing. :shrug: And since the case never went to court, I guess none of us will ever know. Therefore why does Al Sharpton owe the Duke players anything?

You and Rosie are waaaaaay off base on this one.

RVD
Apr 12th, 2007, 08:55 PM
I was about to raise some of these same points in my post--it's hard to occupy the high ground when you're throwing parties, getting drunk and bringing in strippers.

I'll admit I've done my share of drinking, some of it in strip clubs. But even in strip clubs and a parties where alcohol is served there are still limits.Not to mention one of the accused having a rap sheet about as long as the accuser.

mykarma
Apr 12th, 2007, 08:56 PM
I'm sorry, but I missed the part where the Duke players [the three indicted] were found innocent of any wrongdoing. :shrug: And since the case never went to court, I guess none of us will ever know. Therefore why does Al Sharpton owe the Duke players anything?

You and Rosie are waaaaaay off base on this one.
I wonder if anyone got paid or if she was threatened with jail time because of her record. Just a thought.

RVD
Apr 12th, 2007, 09:04 PM
I wonder if anyone got paid or if she was threatened with jail time because of her record. Just a thought.I have so many suppositions to support your post that it ain't even funny.
That and the probability that the DA never intended to go to court in the first place. I mean, that was one ignorant bumbling DA. Who's to say that he wasn't also paid off to screw things up? :shrug:

I'm just pissed that this case will never be tried. :mad:
So the bad guys will once again be rewarded.

samsung101
Apr 12th, 2007, 09:05 PM
CBS just followed MSNBC....not for the racial comments...but, for
the money. The corporate sponsors left, they dropped him. They took
a week for their 'brave' move. They sat back, waited to see what
would happen, and figured it was a good time to pile on.

That's their perogative.

He made CBS millions by being the cranky, negative, hyped up,
often racial commenting old geezer on the radio.




It's a little cowardly in my view.

Because CBS and the AOL/Time Warner and other corporate ties
CBS has, do employ men and women who sing, write, and perform
songs, books, plays, etc., that use the same phrase or words
Imus was fired for. They are often put on the same public airwaves
Imus used to work on.

If we're going to 'clean up' the airwaves, make it apply to everyone.
Not just old white guys.

Will ABC fire Rosie if she make another slip, like her Asian comment a
few weeks ago? No. She's a gay women, she gets a pass. Will they
fire the next rapper, white, black or brown - who uses a slang word
for women, black physical features, or some other derogatory word
rappers or singers like? No.

Should Imus get another radio or tv gig? I hope so. Why not. He's more
famous than ever.

Stamp Paid
Apr 12th, 2007, 09:08 PM
Nappy is a black physical feature?
Wooooooooooooooooowww

Pureracket
Apr 12th, 2007, 09:09 PM
Well, we're sure that you and your husband will tune in, Samsung.

selking
Apr 12th, 2007, 09:11 PM
oh god i hate sharpton and jesse jackson. they are really a disgrace to all african americans

Pureracket
Apr 12th, 2007, 09:12 PM
oh god i hate sharpton and jesse jackson. they are really a disgrace to all african americansYou have two men, and they are disgrace to an entire race?! What a small, shallow, monolithic race you must be referring to here.

Stamp Paid
Apr 12th, 2007, 09:15 PM
oh god i hate sharpton and jesse jackson. they are really a disgrace to all african americans

And George Bush, he's a disgrace to all white Americans.

:confused:

Jesse and Al dont represent anyone but themselves. I wish white people would realize that, and stop appointing them as out so called "leaders" just because they are the loudest and most visible.

*JR*
Apr 12th, 2007, 09:24 PM
And George Bush, he's a disgrace to all white Americans.
Only Texans, as the Dixie Chicks said a few years ago. :tape:

mykarma
Apr 12th, 2007, 09:38 PM
And George Bush, he's a disgrace to all white Americans.

:confused:

Jesse and Al dont represent anyone but themselves. I wish white people would realize that, and stop appointing them as out so called "leaders" just because they are the loudest and most visible.
You didn't give George enough credit, he's a disgrace to all Americans.

RVD
Apr 12th, 2007, 09:41 PM
Nappy is a black physical feature?
Wooooooooooooooooowww'Context' of the spoken word is so very important, King. When one first understands 'context', one can then embrace a word's meaning and intent.

Stamp Paid
Apr 12th, 2007, 09:42 PM
You didn't give George enough credit, he's a disgrace to all Americans.

Not all of us, only the idiots/greedy bastards who voted for him. :help:

Stamp Paid
Apr 12th, 2007, 09:45 PM
'Context' of the spoken word is so very important, King. When one first understands 'context', one can then embrace a word's meaning and intent.

But what did samsung mean when it said:

Will they
fire the next rapper, white, black or brown - who uses a slang word
for women, black physical features, or some other derogatory word
rappers or singers like? No.

mykarma
Apr 12th, 2007, 09:47 PM
But what did samsung mean when it said:
Only her psych knows for sure. :devil::tape:

RVD
Apr 12th, 2007, 10:03 PM
But what did samsung mean when it said:Oh god King! Please tell me you're not quoting Samsung! :eek: :lol:
To answer that, you'll have to ask her. But I'll attempt a reasonable reply. ;)

Will they
fire the next rapper, white, black or brown - who uses a slang word
for women, black physical features, or some other derogatory word
rappers or singers like? No.This response by CBS and the AOL/Time Warner company isn't due to some moral or ethical belief, but rather that of $$$$$$. If advertisers do not pull their $$$, then of course the controlling company will not lose $$$$, and therefore will not pull offensive music.

Now, I have a question... :)

Could you adequately make the comparison between a bunch of knucklehead rappers and that of a multi-millionaire, with major media backing. I myself am finding it hard to do. Granted, I despise Gangsta Rap, and also believe it should die a thousand deaths. But they don't possess the sheer magnitude of influence and power that Imus has [again, with his megla-media connection]. Imus has major political officials regularly on his show. Who do rappers have? :lol:
What powers and influence do they possess?

Pureracket
Apr 12th, 2007, 10:09 PM
Oh god King! Please tell me you're not quoting Samsung! :eek: :lol:
To answer that, you'll have to ask her. But I'll attempt a reasonable reply. ;)
This response by CBS and the AOL/Time Warner company isn't due to some moral or ethical belief, but rather that of $$$$$$. If advertisers do not pull their $$$, then of course the controlling company will not lose $$$$, and therefore will not pull offensive music.

Now, I have a question... :)

Could you adequately make the comparison between a bunch of knucklehead rappers and that of a multi-millionaire, with major media backing. I myself am finding it hard to do. Granted, I despise Gangsta Rap, and also believe it should die a thousand deaths. But they don't possess the sheer magnitude of influence and power that Imus has [again, with his megla-media connection]. Imus has major political officials. Who do rappers have? :lol:
What powers and influence do they possess?RVD,
Most of these rappers are probably richer than Imus, and I think their influence may be more far reaching than what you give them credit for. In an attempt to make sure Imus gets what he deserves, we must also look inward.

Discrimination and insult don't always have a colour.

RVD
Apr 12th, 2007, 10:16 PM
Only her psych knows for sure. :devil::tape::haha: I'll be honest...
I've been trying to figure Samsung out for some time now. And I'm stumped. :lol: :worship:
She never answers a question directly, but rather with Fox News jargon. :scared: I swear, it's like a Fox News super-computer processing every other word it reads and then spewing forth a closely related Fox News commentary and stamping it with ‘Samsung’ at the end.
Scaaaaaarrrrry.

RVD
Apr 12th, 2007, 10:27 PM
RVD,
Most of these rappers are probably richer than Imus, and I think their influence may be more far reaching than what you give them credit for. In an attempt to make sure Imus gets what he deserves, we must also look inward.Well, I don't know if "most" of these rappers are richer than Imus or not. But in terms of power and influence, Imus "had" all rappers trumped. I mean, I've never heard of a single rapper holding sway over so many powerful people [political and 'non'] as Imus.

As for 'looking inward', I fully agree with you. Hell, we have a hell of a lot of work to do ourselves.
Discrimination and insult don't always have a colour.But 'racial' discrimination does. And isn't that what Imus is guilty of? :scratch:

mykarma
Apr 12th, 2007, 10:37 PM
:haha: I'll be honest...
I've been trying to figure Samsung out for some time now. And I'm stumped. :lol: :worship:
She never answers a question directly, but rather with Fox News jargon. :scared: I swear, it's like a Fox News super-computer processing every other word it reads and then spewing forth a closely related Fox News commentary and stamping it with ‘Samsung’ at the end.
Scaaaaaarrrrry.
Fox or Rush?

kiwifan
Apr 12th, 2007, 10:49 PM
From the looks of this thread, it seems like white people pay more attention to Sharpton than black people do.

:haha:


:worship: :worship: :worship: :worship: :worship:

Malin
Apr 12th, 2007, 10:59 PM
I think in this case the punishment Imus is getting far exceeds the crime he committed. Yes it was wrong and he apologized. He should not be getting fired from every job.

Also, it's interesting how Isiah Washington can refer to his castmate as a "******" which is also a blatant act of discrimination yet he still has his job.

RVD
Apr 12th, 2007, 11:00 PM
Fox or Rush?All three. :devil:

mykarma
Apr 12th, 2007, 11:46 PM
I think in this case the punishment Imus is getting far exceeds the crime he committed. Yes it was wrong and he apologized. He should not be getting fired from every job.

Also, it's interesting how Isiah Washington can refer to his castmate as a "******" which is also a blatant act of discrimination yet he still has his job.
http://wtaworld.com/showthread.php?t=294427&page=2#27

darrinbaker00
Apr 12th, 2007, 11:49 PM
I think in this case the punishment Imus is getting far exceeds the crime he committed. Yes it was wrong and he apologized. He should not be getting fired from every job.

Also, it's interesting how Isiah Washington can refer to his castmate as a "******" which is also a blatant act of discrimination yet he still has his job.
Don Imus lost his job because his employers were losing sponsors. If ABC had lost sponsors because of what Isaiah Washington said, they would have fired him.

Rocketta
Apr 12th, 2007, 11:59 PM
I think in this case the punishment Imus is getting far exceeds the crime he committed. Yes it was wrong and he apologized. He should not be getting fired from every job.

Also, it's interesting how Isiah Washington can refer to his castmate as a "******" which is also a blatant act of discrimination yet he still has his job.

So now that the rap angle hasn't worked...we're on to Isiah now. Get back to me when Isiah said that live on air on a natioanally syndicated show about people he never met and then we can start to discuss the similarities/differences in the two situations.

Shane54
Apr 13th, 2007, 12:00 AM
Look what Imus did is just plain wrong and he should have been fired. The Rutgers team was an innocent group of women working their way through college and playing a sport they love. Congrats to them. Even though they beat my LSU! LOL ;)

On the other hand, samsung I agree with you that the black leaders who rushed to judgement, should apologize.

It's just the political environment of PC now. I guess you could call getting back at "whitey".

I am for racism of ALL kinds to be gone. That is the only way to get rid of it.

But Samsung- I love your posts! :worship:

In summary, IMUS WAS WRONG, AND SO WERE JACKSON AND SHARPTON

Malin
Apr 13th, 2007, 12:02 AM
Don Imus lost his job because his employers were losing sponsors. If ABC had lost sponsors because of what Isaiah Washington said, they would have fired him.

I should have been more clear but i was referring to everyone who is calling for Imus to be fired but didn't say that about Isiah, which is wrong because both acts are equally awful, I wasn't really referring to the sponsors just what everyone was arguing before he lost his job

Malin
Apr 13th, 2007, 12:04 AM
So now that the rap angle hasn't worked...we're on to Isiah now. Get back to me when Isiah said that live on air on a natioanally syndicated show about people he never met and then we can start to discuss the similarities/differences in the two situations.

i don't know the whole story but I believe he repeated what he said on an awards show telecast

Rocketta
Apr 13th, 2007, 12:16 AM
i don't know the whole story but I believe he repeated what he said on an awards show telecast

yeah you're right you don't know the whole story. How once again is that comparable? He didn't repeat what he said, he repeated the word while he was denying saying it. He shouldn't have but he didn't call anyone that name and he certainly didn't call people he never met that word. That was a fight on the set of Show between two co-workers, that someone else felt was news and reported it to the media. Imus didn't say this in private he said on air on a national syndicated show in an attempt to belittle a group of women whose only possible flaws to warrent that label was hard work and success.

RVD
Apr 13th, 2007, 12:16 AM
Look what Imus did is just plain wrong and he should have been fired. The Rutgers team was an innocent group of women working their way through college and playing a sport they love. Congrats to them. Even though they beat my LSU! LOL ;)

On the other hand, samsung I agree with you that the black leaders who rushed to judgement, should apologize.Normally I purposely overlook posts like these. However, today my curiosity streak has got the better of me. So Shane54, what exactly should these black leaders apologize for? I mean 'specifically'? Are you referring to the information that the DA released?
It's just the political environment of PC now. I guess you could call getting back at "whitey".So the Imus issue is now a 'political' one now? Not a moral or ethical one? Amazing!
Now had you said 'financial', I would have agreed.
I am for racism of ALL kinds to be gone. That is the only way to get rid of it.But didn't you just say above that the Imus issue is a political one? Or were you referring to something else entirely? :scratch:
In summary, IMUS WAS WRONG, AND SO WERE JACKSON AND SHARPTONAll things relative, everyone is free to have an opinion. However, the one does not equate to the other. The amazing thing is how difficult this is for many to understand? :confused:

*Still seeking an equal comparison of an Imus, Al, and Jesse analogy*

No Name Face
Apr 13th, 2007, 12:19 AM
Nappy is a black physical feature?
Wooooooooooooooooowww

That's what one of my white friends told me, so it must be true.




((When I said that has racist connotations, he acted like I was pulling the race card. :lol: ))

Malin
Apr 13th, 2007, 12:20 AM
yeah you're right you don't know the whole story. How once again is that comparable? He didn't repeat what he said, he repeated the word while he was denying saying it. He shouldn't have but he didn't call anyone that name and he certainly didn't call people he never met that word. That was a fight on the set of Show between two co-workers, that someone else felt was news and reported it to the media. Imus didn't say this in private he said on air on a national syndicated show in an attempt to belittle a group of women whose only possible flaws to warrent that label was hard work and success.

oh well, I don't know why that make's Isiah's comments any better, he should of gotten fired for his discrimination just as Imus has. They both are wrong, I don't know how you can defend such hate.

Rocketta
Apr 13th, 2007, 12:22 AM
The funny thing is if people want Al and Jesse to stop talking then why don't you tell the media to stop asking them? Also, make up your mind, does Al and Jessie have clout and are important enough to warrent a need for an apology or are they nobody hacks that no one listens to? Make up your mind people. Is Jessie SOMEBODY or not?

RVD
Apr 13th, 2007, 12:24 AM
That's what one of my white friends told me, so it must be true.




((When I said that has racist connotations, he acted like I was pulling the race card. :lol: ))NNF, I believe that you just answered my question for me. Do you get the sense that your friend was thinking on a completely different level than yourself, and so failed to understand your point?

No Name Face
Apr 13th, 2007, 12:25 AM
Well, I mean...they should apologize if they actually had real clout. But I thought to most people they were just pompous, race-war starting douchebags. I mean...why do they matter now as opposed to before?

Now I'm not a fan of either, but I don't think of them as speaking for me. Therefore, it doesn't matter to me if they issue an apology.

No Name Face
Apr 13th, 2007, 12:29 AM
NNF, I believe that you just answered my question for me. Do you get the sense that your friend was thinking on a completely different level than yourself, and so failed to understand your point?

Well, to answer your question I think he was thinking on a different level, but one that is misinformed and really has no basis.

Not to be mean, but he's just an idiot. And not really my friend, either. He's somewhat of a closet racist, even though he doesn't know it. He said that black people having nappy hair is a physical trait and when I tried to explain to him that calling a black person on being 'nappy' is construed as a negative in the black community, he looked at me like I didn't know what I was talking about. And I laugh, because I just rubbed in the Imus comment and now he looks like an idiot. Again.

I think this is my 10,000th post. :dance:
edit --- one away. :p

RVD
Apr 13th, 2007, 12:30 AM
But Rocketta, these people need a point of deflection. And since in their minds Jesse and Al represent the black population, who better to ask than those two?
For the record, neither represents me, or my extended family. :wavey:

lucie_girl
Apr 13th, 2007, 12:31 AM
So now that the rap angle hasn't worked...we're on to Isiah now. Get back to me when Isiah said that live on air on a natioanally syndicated show about people he never met and then we can start to discuss the similarities/differences in the two situations.
So, calling someone a ******, and then repeating the word on national television is less offensive than calling someone a hoe.

Oh, I forgot, he's black. And OJ was framed. Hehe, some things just never change.

RVD
Apr 13th, 2007, 12:34 AM
Well, to answer your question I think he was thinking on a different level, but one that is misinformed and really has no basis.

Not to be mean, but he's just an idiot. And not really my friend, either. He's somewhat of a closet racist, even though he doesn't know it. He said that black people having nappy hair is a physical trait and when I tried to explain to him that calling a black person on being 'nappy' is construed as a negative in the black community, he looked at me like I didn't know what I was talking about. And I laugh, because I just rubbed in the Imus comment and now he looks like an idiot. Again.

I think this is my 10,000th post. :dance:
edit --- one away. :pAh, I see. :lol: I feel for you then. Sounds quite a bit like an exercise in futility...getting him to understand. Sadly, many are that why. My workout buddy is similar, but at least he makes the attempt and doesn’t utilize deflection to prove his point. :yeah:

Rocketta
Apr 13th, 2007, 12:35 AM
oh well, I don't know why that make's Isiah's comments any better, he should of gotten fired for his discrimination just as Imus has. They both are wrong, I don't know how you can defend such hate.

Whose defending Isiah? Just pointing out they are not the same and they are not. There are plenty of Isiah threads with plenty of people calling for him to be fired but once again WHAT does that have to do with IMUS?

However, lets look at this analogy.....if something happened to one then it should happen to the other. At the time Isiah said that, Imus still had a job and Imus had said many many many racially and sexually offensive things before that and he still had a job. So if Isiah should get the same treatment as Imus, he's got twenty years of homophobic comments to spew on the world before he loses his job. If we want to hold them to the same standards that is. :shrug: or are you suggesting holding them to different standards? You know Imus gets twenty years and 50 comments and Isiah gets one comment during an argument with a co-worker that was leaked to the press? Are these the same standards we are talking about?

oh and before anyone tells me I wouldn't be saying that if blah blah blah, I worked with a white lady who called her employee's the "n-word" and didn't lose her job. Not only did she not lose her job, she was currently working on a HBCU at the time she did it. They had a big time argument and were screaming and yelling and well her deep down thoughts just came out. They forgave her. She worked fine with everyone. So to me no it's not unusual or unfair that Isiah didn't lose his job...I've seen just as bad if not worse things said at work in arguments.

Rocketta
Apr 13th, 2007, 12:36 AM
So, calling someone a ******, and then repeating the word on national television is less offensive than calling someone a hoe.

Oh, I forgot, he's black. And OJ was framed. Hehe, some things just never change.

yeah and some trolls never stop registering for new usernames. :o

Rocketta
Apr 13th, 2007, 12:39 AM
Well, I mean...they should apologize if they actually had real clout. But I thought to most people they were just pompous, race-war starting douchebags. I mean...why do they matter now as opposed to before?

Now I'm not a fan of either, but I don't think of them as speaking for me. Therefore, it doesn't matter to me if they issue an apology.

because Imus can't just be wrong and deserve to be fired........someone else has to also be wrong. :shrug:

RVD
Apr 13th, 2007, 12:40 AM
So, calling someone a ******, and then repeating the word on national television is less offensive than calling someone a hoe.

Oh, I forgot, he's black. And OJ was framed. Hehe, some things just never change.WAAAY off-topic!

However,... umm...was O.J found guilty? Didn't think so. And granted, if there was even an inkling of 'supporting' "circumstantial" evidence, this legal system would have hung him out to dry.

RVD
Apr 13th, 2007, 12:52 AM
Whose defending Isiah? Just pointing out they are not the same and they are not. There are plenty of Isiah threads with plenty of people calling for him to be fired but once again WHAT does that have to do with IMUS?

However, lets look at this analogy.....if something happened to one then it should happen to the other. At the time Isiah said that, Imus still had a job and Imus had said many many many racially and sexually offensive things before that and he still had a job. So if Isiah should get the same treatment as Imus, he's got twenty years of homophobic comments to spew on the world before he loses his job. If we want to hold them to the same standards that is. :shrug: or are you suggesting holding them to different standards? You know Imus gets twenty years and 50 comments and Isiah gets one comment during an argument with a co-worker that was leaked to the press? Are these the same standards we are talking about?

oh and before anyone tells me I wouldn't be saying that if blah blah blah, I worked with a white lady who called her employee's the "n-word" and didn't lose her job. Not only did she not lose her job, she was currently working on a HBCU at the time she did it. They had a big time argument and were screaming and yelling and well her deep down thoughts just came out. They forgave her. She worked fine with everyone. So to me no it's not unusual or unfair that Isiah didn't lose his job...I've seen just as bad if not worse things said at work in arguments.So are you saying that with Imus, there is a clear-cut pattern of racism-apology-racism-apology-racism...then hiring a racist to do the dirty work; then firing and hiring the guy back when the an issue has died down? http://deephousepage.com/smilies/scratchchin.gif Hmmm...? What a concept. :lol:
But I doubt many will believe it, even with the FACTS documented to indicate such.

meyerpl
Apr 13th, 2007, 01:02 AM
Let's not drag O.J. into this discussion. There's a big difference between shooting your mouth off; making misogynistic, racist or homophobic remarks and......butchering two people in cold blood! I think they're quite different situations.

By the way, O.J. said he never wrote the "confessional" chapter in his yet-to-be-published book........and he won't rest until he finds the person who did!

RVD
Apr 13th, 2007, 01:13 AM
Let's not drag O.J. into this discussion. There's a big difference between shooting your mouth off; making misogynistic, racist or homophobic remarks and......butchering two people in cold blood! I think they're quite different situations.

By the way, O.J. said he never wrote the "confessional" chapter in his yet-to-be-published book........and he won't rest until he finds the person who did!:lol: I must say, you still make me laugh, redardless of the topic. :wavey:
And even when we don't agree, I still get a kick out of your wry sense of humor.

mykarma
Apr 13th, 2007, 01:16 AM
Look what Imus did is just plain wrong and he should have been fired. The Rutgers team was an innocent group of women working their way through college and playing a sport they love. Congrats to them. Even though they beat my LSU! LOL ;)

On the other hand, samsung I agree with you that the black leaders who rushed to judgement, should apologize.

It's just the political environment of PC now. I guess you could call getting back at "whitey".

I am for racism of ALL kinds to be gone. That is the only way to get rid of it.

But Samsung- I love your posts! :worship:


In summary, IMUS WAS WRONG, AND SO WERE JACKSON AND SHARPTON
I guess you can call that statement stupid. :rolleyes:

meyerpl
Apr 13th, 2007, 01:18 AM
:lol: I must say, you still make me laugh, redardless of the topic. :wavey:
And even when we don't agree, I still get a kick out of your wry sense of humor.
Thanks much! I really appreciate your kind words.:wavey:

Now, if only my wife thought the way you do...........;)

mykarma
Apr 13th, 2007, 01:22 AM
So, calling someone a ******, and then repeating the word on national television is less offensive than calling someone a hoe.

Oh, I forgot, he's black. And OJ was framed. Hehe, some things just never change.
Real tough post to be your second post on this board.

meyerpl
Apr 13th, 2007, 01:49 AM
So, calling someone a ******, and then repeating the word on national television is less offensive than calling someone a hoe.

Oh, I forgot, he's black. And OJ was framed. Hehe, some things just never change.
I swore I wasn't going to touch this thread with a ten foot pole but I can't let this one slide.

For starters, Washington wasn't sitting in front of a microphone speaking to millions of listeners when he made his stupid, homophobic remark. Additionally, Washington's bread and butter isn't being an asshole and offending virtually everyone on the planet. He's an actor; he wears clothes somebody tells him to wear, stands in front of a camera and speaks lines somebody else wrote for him to say. (I know, it doesn't take a genious, but it's nice work if you can get it.) Imus, on the other hand, has devoted his professional life to being an abrasive prick, a "shock-jock". You could fill a book with the nasty, cruel, fucked-up things he's said about people over the years. His "body of work" is a patch-work quilt of loathsome vitriol.

It isn't comparing apples to oranges, it's comparing apples to spoiled tripe.

CrossCourt~Rally
Apr 13th, 2007, 01:50 AM
He will not appologize. The man is permanently on the defensive. Al Sharpton is not a mentally well man. Thats all that needs to be said on this subject...quite sad really. :help: :wavey:

*JR*
Apr 13th, 2007, 01:51 AM
WAAAY off-topic!

However,... umm...was O.J found guilty? Didn't think so. And granted, if there was even an inkling of 'supporting' "circumstantial" evidence, this legal system would have hung him out to dry.
You know better than that. There was a huge amount of circumstantial evidence (including DNA) but it was handled sloppily, giving a jury which (correctly) found Fuhrman offensive an excuse to find a reasonable doubt.

CrossCourt~Rally
Apr 13th, 2007, 01:57 AM
I swore I wasn't going to touch this thread with a ten foot pole but I can't let this one slide.

For starters, Washington wasn't sitting in front of a microphone speaking to millions of listeners when he made his stupid, homophobic remark. Additionally, Washington's bread and butter isn't being an asshole and offending virtually everyone on the planet. He's an actor; he wears clothes somebody tells him to wear, stands in front of a camera and speaks lines somebody else wrote for him to say. (I know, it doesn't take a genious, but it's nice work if you can get it.) Imus, on the other hand, has devoted his professional life to being an abrasive prick, a "shock-jock". You could fill a book with the nasty, cruel, fucked-up things he's said about people over the years. His "body of work" is a patch-work quilt of loathsome vitriol.

It isn't comparing apples to oranges, it's comparing apples to spoiled tripe.

Yes he was. Mr Washington was at a press conference at the Golden Globes with cameras right in front of his face. Now, mind you...this was the 2nd time he has spewed these words. But rest assured that GLAAD and many other human rights organizations are working on getting him fired aswell as a hefty fine donated to the Human Rights Campaign. He knew that every word was being recorded and had the possibility of ending up on the new magazine shows for millions and millions to see. Over 8 million people watch ET every night.
Oh and your correct...i am backing out of this thread aswell. This would make a great SNL skit though along with the IMUS thread :lol: So over the top ignorant that you just have to sit back and f*ckin laugh your ass off while your clickin the X button :lol: :lol: :lol: ...:wavey:

mykarma
Apr 13th, 2007, 02:14 AM
You know better than that. There was a huge amount of circumstantial evidence (including DNA) but it was handled sloppily, giving a jury which (correctly) found Fuhrman offensive an excuse to find a reasonable doubt.
If it doesn't fit; you must acquit.:angel:

mykarma
Apr 13th, 2007, 02:15 AM
He will not appologize. The man is permanently on the defensive. Al Sharpton is not a mentally well man. Thats all that needs to be said on this subject...quite sad really. :help: :wavey:
And Don Anus is. :eek:

Mother_Marjorie
Apr 13th, 2007, 02:16 AM
If it doesn't fit; you must acquit.:angel:
Yes, ask Crystal if she would agree.

kiwifan
Apr 13th, 2007, 02:21 AM
Funny how posters are just throwing shit up against the wall and trying to change the focus.

If your examples don't include insults to the Rutgers Womens Basketball you examples are irrelevant in the issue of Imus v Rutgers Womens Basketball. :shrug:

lizchris
Apr 13th, 2007, 02:38 AM
Al Sharpton doesn't owe the Duke players any apology because he was never part of the case. He was never in Duhram, nor did he ever make any public comments. Now Jessee Jackson did and he probably owes them an apology, but if I were him, I wouldn't rush to do so.

treufreund
Apr 13th, 2007, 02:46 AM
I think in this case the punishment Imus is getting far exceeds the crime he committed. Yes it was wrong and he apologized. He should not be getting fired from every job.

Also, it's interesting how Isiah Washington can refer to his castmate as a "******" which is also a blatant act of discrimination yet he still has his job.

Didn't you get the memo that attacking gays and lesbians is still way more acceptable than attacking blacks? :rolleyes: In fact, it's still acceptable to not give us our civil rights, not protect us from hate crimes, not allow us to serve openly in our military and not marry the people we love. ( don't misunderstand me. Imus was 100% in the wrong, but as a gay male I still cannot believe how passive my own community in accepting these outrages and how duplicitous the rest of society is for not even acknowledging them. :sad:)

treufreund
Apr 13th, 2007, 02:50 AM
Funny how posters are just throwing shit up against the wall and trying to change the focus.

If your examples don't include insults to the Rutgers Womens Basketball you examples are irrelevant in the issue of Imus v Rutgers Womens Basketball. :shrug:

I bring up other points that I think are relevant and that I would like to discuss. I think most people have said for about a week now that Imus was wrong, but this type of transgression opens up wounds that lead to other discussions. We cannot heal as a nation if we feel we cannot discuss what has hurt or angered us. I, for one, as a gay man still feel quite a bit of anger and still feel very much like discrimination against people in my community is more tolerated or excused. Sadly, if I point that out, some people think I am in the wrong for doing so.:sad:

Mother_Marjorie
Apr 13th, 2007, 02:55 AM
Al Sharpton doesn't owe the Duke players any apology because he was never part of the case. He was never in Duhram, nor did he ever make any public comments. Now Jessee Jackson did and he probably owes them an apology, but if I were him, I wouldn't rush to do so.
I guess you didn't watch the two times "Rev" Al Sharpton appeared on Larry King Live early in the investigation.

I guess you chose not to watch "Rev" Al Sharpton on his talk show tour discussing the case either.

Liz, YOU were the one in this forum which all but convicted these three young men of doing something they were innocent for. YOU, as well as the NAACP, Rev. Al Sharpton, Rev. Jesse Jackson and the The Black Panthers owe those young men an apology for your red herring.

Mother_Marjorie
Apr 13th, 2007, 03:01 AM
Cleared Duke Players Could Sue

Apr 12 05:02 PM US/Eastern
By STEVE HARTSOE
Associated Press Writer


RALEIGH, N.C. (AP) - The disgraced district attorney in the Duke lacrosse rape case apologized to the three athletes in a carefully worded statement Thursday as their lawyers weighed whether to sue him—and some legal experts say they have a case.
While prosecutors generally have immunity for what they do inside the courtroom, experts said that protection probably doesn't cover some of Mike Nifong's more questionable actions in his handling of the case—such as calling the lacrosse players "a bunch of hooligans" in one of several interviews deemed unethical by the state bar.

"I think their chances of success suing Mr. Nifong are reasonably good, despite what we call prosecutorial immunity," said John Banzhaf, a professor at the George Washington University School of Law.

On Wednesday, North Carolina Attorney General Roy threw out the case against the three young men, pronounced them innocent and delivered a withering attack on Nifong, portraying him as a "rogue" prosecutor guilty of "overreaching." Cooper said Nifong rushed the case, failed to verify the accuser's allegations and pressed on despite the warning signs.

In his first comment on that decision, Nifong said in a statement Thursday: "To the extent that I made judgments that ultimately proved to be incorrect, I apologize to the three students that were wrongly accused."

He issued what appeared to be a plea to the students not to take any further action, saying, "It is my sincere desire that the actions of Attorney General Cooper will serve to remedy any remaining injury that has resulted from these cases."

So far, attorneys for David Evans, Reade Seligmann, and Collin Finnerty have not said whether they plan a civil action against Nifong. But they have not ruled it out.

"We're certainly going to be advising him and the Seligmann family of all of their options. But nobody is racing to file any kind of a lawsuit at this point," said Jim Cooney, Seligmann's attorney.

Separately, the North Carolina bar charged Nifong months ago with several violations of professional conduct that could lead to his disbarment. The case is set for trial before a bar committee in June.

Among other things, the bar said Nifong made misleading and inflammatory comments about the athletes, even before they were charged. In the early days of the case, for example, Nifong said several times that members of the lacrosse team were not cooperating with investigators. Not true, according to court documents.

Experts said the ethics charges could form the basis for a lawsuit seeking damages from Nifong.

"Ordinarily, a prosecutor has absolute immunity for the actions he takes in preparation for a case, but there are some caveats to that, and one of them is he does not have absolute immunity for misleading statements he gives at press conferences," said Shannon Gilreath, an adjunct professor at the Wake Forest University School of Law.

Other actions Nifong took outside of the courtroom could open him up to a lawsuit, Banzhaf said. Nifong, among other things, directed the police lineup at which the accuser identified the three players; the lineup has been criticized as faulty. The bar has also accused Nifong of lying in court about having turned over all DNA test results to the defense.

"When he acts as an investigator and advises police, or makes representations to court which may be false, in all these situations he does not have absolute immunity," Banzhaf said.

But Norm Early, a former Denver district attorney who has worked for the National District Attorneys Association, said Nifong's actions alone are not enough to win a lawsuit. Nifong's intent is crucial.

"The protection of immunity is pretty broad unless it's ruled he had malicious intent or that it was something close to that," Early said. "It would be very difficult to prove a case against him."

Other potential targets for a lawsuit include the accuser herself. Cooper said his investigators concluded no attack took place.

"There's no question they've got a lawsuit against her if she's brought false charges against them, which may be even more easily provable than actions against Nifong," said Stan Goldman, a professor at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles.

In October, months before the bar filed its ethics complaint, Evans' mother warned in an interview: "Mr. Nifong, you've picked on the wrong families ... and you will pay every day for the rest of your life."

How much money they could get out of Nifong is unclear.

Nifong is a career civil servant, and his financial disclosure statement filed with the state suggests he is not especially wealthy. His only listed income is his salary of about $110,000, and aside from his home in Durham and some unspecified real estate in western North Carolina, he appears to have no significant assets outside of any mutual funds and retirement accounts.

"I think it's fair to say they're angry," Cooney, Seligmann's attorney, said of the families. "It's an anger of, 'What part of innocent don't you understand?' It's not, `We're going to go take your house and pension plan.' There's no plan to seek revenge against anybody."

That has left some to suggest the players and their families might sue Duke University, which has been heavily criticized in some quarters for suspending the players and canceling the lacrosse team's season before the young men were even tried.

But Banzhaf said such a lawsuit is not likely to succeed, since university administrators did not have access to the facts of the case and were basing their actions on what they learned from Nifong.

A Duke spokesman declined to comment on the prospect of a lawsuit.

Goldman said the real aim of a lawsuit against Duke, an elite private school with a multibillion-dollar endowment, might be to win an out- of-court settlement and recoup what are sure to be staggering legal bills.

"I can see Duke University just settling with these guys, even if there isn't a tremendous basis" for a suit, Goldman said. "Duke's got a lot of money and been around a long time."

Shane54
Apr 13th, 2007, 03:11 AM
I guess you didn't watch the two times "Rev" Al Sharpton appeared on Larry King Live early in the investigation.

I guess you chose not to watch "Rev" Al Sharpton on his talk show tour discussing the case either.

Liz, YOU were the one in this forum which all but convicted these three young men of doing something they were innocent for. YOU, as well as the NAACP, Rev. Al Sharpton, Rev. Jesse Jackson and the The Black Panthers owe those young men an apology for your red herring.

Thank you Marjorie! Love your posts! It is clear that this case is based on racial lines. People complain on these boards about how things like this are done everyday to blacks. Which I agree-it happens. But then they are the first ones to rush to judgement against the Duke players. I thought rush to judgement was wrong regardless of your color? :scratch:

Well Marjorie love your posts! anyway..:worship:

lizchris
Apr 13th, 2007, 03:12 AM
I guess you didn't watch the two times "Rev" Al Sharpton appeared on Larry King Live early in the investigation.

I guess you chose not to watch "Rev" Al Sharpton on his talk show tour discussing the case either.

Liz, YOU were the one in this forum which all but convicted these three young men of doing something they were innocent for. YOU, as well as the NAACP, Rev. Al Sharpton, Rev. Jesse Jackson and the The Black Panthers owe those young men an apology for your red herring.


Even if that is the case (with Rev. Sharpton), which I doubt, I still don't think they are owed an apology.

treufreund
Apr 13th, 2007, 03:20 AM
Even if that is the case (with Rev. Sharpton), which I doubt, I still don't think they are owed an apology.

How could you even say such a thing? the men were FALSELY ACCUSED and JUDGED IN ADVANCE of a HEINOUS CRIME. How could you be more angry about a hateful utterance (which was totally wrong) than something that could destroy a person's life and reputation. To be falsely accused of a FELONY is far more serious and injurious. Where is your heart? Is there too much anger in your heart to not feel a sense of outrage for BOTH the RUTGERS TEAM and THREE YOUNG MEN WRONGFULLY ACCUSED and LAMBASTED NATIONALLY?:mad::fiery:

lizchris
Apr 13th, 2007, 03:27 AM
How could you even say such a thing? the men were FALSELY ACCUSED and JUDGED IN ADVANCE of a HEINOUS CRIME. How could you be more angry about a hateful utterance (which was totally wrong) than something that could destroy a person's life and reputation. To be falsely accused of a FELONY is far more serious and injurious. Where is your heart? Is there too much anger in your heart to not feel a sense of outrage for BOTH the RUTGERS TEAM and THREE YOUNG MEN WRONGFULLY ACCUSED and LAMBASTED NATIONALLY?:mad::fiery:


Do you know HOW MANY black men were falsey incarcerated for being FALSELY convicted of raping white women. For those who didn't die in prision and were able to be exonerated because of DNA, they have yet to recieve an apology from any white person who put them in jail (and believe me, almost all of these men were tired by white judges and prosecutors). When that happenes to the 4 black men in Chicago who were weeks away from being executed for a rape and murder of a white woman which they didn't commit, the black man in the Bronx who was just let out of jail for a rape he didn't commit and the two black men in Texas, who were exonerated for rapes against white people they didn't commit, then I will feel outrage for these three young men, but until that day happens, no can do.

mykarma
Apr 13th, 2007, 03:30 AM
I guess you didn't watch the two times "Rev" Al Sharpton appeared on Larry King Live early in the investigation.

I guess you chose not to watch "Rev" Al Sharpton on his talk show tour discussing the case either.

Liz, YOU were the one in this forum which all but convicted these three young men of doing something they were innocent for. YOU, as well as the NAACP, Rev. Al Sharpton, Rev. Jesse Jackson and the The Black Panthers owe those young men an apology for your red herring.
Al Sharpton never said these guys were guilty. He wanted the case to be investigated. The NAACP and leaders in Durham were admirable. They made sure that the neighborhood let the justice system work but of course you and your side kicks have chosen to ignore that. :rolleyes: Typical.

treufreund
Apr 13th, 2007, 03:39 AM
Do you know HOW MANY black men were falsey incarcerated for being FALSELY convicted of raping white women. For those who didn't die in prision and were able to be exonerated because of DNA, they have yet to recieve an apology from any white person who put them in jail (and believe me, almost all of these men were tired by white judges and prosecutors). When that happenes to the 4 black men in Chicago who were weeks away from being executed for a rape and murder of a white woman which they didn't commit, the black man in the Bronx who was just let out of jail for a rape he didn't commit and the two black men in Texas, who were exonerated for rapes against white people they didn't commit, then I will feel outrage for these three young men, but until that day happens, no can do.

I agree with you 100% about how repulsive that is. My point being is that an injustice committed against ANY HUMAN BEING should outrage and anger you. I implore and BEG you to open your heart more. I understand what you are saying. I don't want to yell at you or judge but I have been persecuted, discriminated against, physically bashed and fired from jobs for being a gay man. I know what it feels like to be excluded. But NOBODY, NOBODY deserves what happened to those Duke lacrosse players. Same thing applies for the many black people wrongfully accused and imprisoned. This world is so full of hurt and needs healing. :sad:

kiwifan
Apr 13th, 2007, 03:42 AM
I bring up other points that I think are relevant and that I would like to discuss. I think most people have said for about a week now that Imus was wrong, but this type of transgression opens up wounds that lead to other discussions. We cannot heal as a nation if we feel we cannot discuss what has hurt or angered us. I, for one, as a gay man still feel quite a bit of anger and still feel very much like discrimination against people in my community is more tolerated or excused. Sadly, if I point that out, some people think I am in the wrong for doing so.:sad:

That stuff belongs in another thread...

...in fact it was in several other threads...

...throwing in this thread to deflect from this incident seems a tad shady...

...heck starting this thread seems beyond shady. :shrug:

Final comment in this thread for me: it doesn't take a mensa member to distinguish between an irresponsible cold blooded insult based on nothing and a blowhard "civil rights activist" foaming at the mouth on shit he knows nothing about...based on the facts as they were at the time according to the friggin' DA.

But seems to me y'all don't really care about the facts do you. :yawn:

Rocketta
Apr 13th, 2007, 03:43 AM
Funny how posters are just throwing shit up against the wall and trying to change the focus.

If your examples don't include insults to the Rutgers Womens Basketball you examples are irrelevant in the issue of Imus v Rutgers Womens Basketball. :shrug:

must be a full moon because the lunatics are out in full force. :scared: Apparently, whether Al apologizes or not has something to do with whether it was fair or not that Imus lost his job...forget that he's been saying shit for years and years and years and years.......I suspect tomorrow Snoop Dogg will be responsible for Imus' bad treatment. :tape:

treufreund
Apr 13th, 2007, 03:48 AM
That stuff belongs in another thread...

...in fact it was in several other threads...

...throwing in this thread to deflect from this incident seems a tad shady...

...heck starting this thread seems beyond shady. :shrug:

Final comment in this thread for me: it doesn't take a mensa member to distinguish between an irresponsible cold blooded insult based on nothing and a blowhard "civil rights activist" foaming at the mouth on shit he knows nothing about...based on the facts as they were at the time according to the friggin' DA.

But seems to me y'all don't really care about the facts do you. :yawn:


I don't want those comments in another thread. It's relevant to this discussion. Why don't you want people to hear what I have to say? I don't enjoy being :tape:

lizchris
Apr 13th, 2007, 03:54 AM
must be a full moon because the lunatics are out in full force. :scared: Apparently, whether Al apologizes or not has something to do with whether it was fair or not that Imus lost his job...forget that he's been saying shit for years and years and years and years.......I suspect tomorrow Snoop Dogg will be responsible for Imus' bad treatment. :tape:


And here is a list of some of the morons:

Joe Scarborough (a former congressman who decided not to run for Congress again when a staffer he was "very close to" was found dead)

Michelle Malkin (a dumb b***h who posted the names and home addresses of liberal protesters on her website, but then had the nerve to cry a river of crocodile tears when the same was done to her on a liberal website because she started getting death threats)

Jason Whitlock (a sports wirter who fashions himself as the big and greasy version of Bill Cosby who had the nerve to blame the Rutgers players for the story being as big as it is)

Sean Hannity (a conservative on the Fox News Channel, who sexuality and fidelilty to his wife has been questioned)

Rush Limbaugh (racist, drug addict and who has a disability he nevers talks about, but I will because it is the reason he is always so mad)


BTW, Rocketts, every balck rapper, living or dead, will be blamed for the I-Mess, once everything is over.

HippityHop
Apr 13th, 2007, 04:12 AM
I'm sorry, but I missed the part where the Duke players [the three indicted] were found innocent of any wrongdoing. :shrug: And since the case never went to court, I guess none of us will ever know. Therefore why does Al Sharpton owe the Duke players anything?

You and Rosie are waaaaaay off base on this one.


I must say that of all the posts in this thread, this one strikes me as the most interesting. But even more interesting than the post itself is the fact that no one seems to think that there is anything wrong with it. This does not bode well for our legal system.

RVD
Apr 13th, 2007, 04:42 AM
You know better than that. There was a huge amount of circumstantial evidence (including DNA) but it was handled sloppily, giving a jury which (correctly) found Fuhrman offensive an excuse to find a reasonable doubt.:lol: Very good grasshopper. You have succeeded in snatching the pebble from my hand. :lol: ;)

In fact, the entire case was based upon nothing more than circumstantial evidence. ;) :wavey:
However, really you can't count his blood and DNA since all were tainted, and purposely mishandled and manipulated. :devil:

RVD
Apr 13th, 2007, 04:46 AM
Yes he was. Mr Washington was at a press conference at the Golden Globes with cameras right in front of his face. Now, mind you...this was the 2nd time he has spewed these words. But rest assured that GLAAD and many other human rights organizations are working on getting him fired aswell as a hefty fine donated to the Human Rights Campaign. He knew that every word was being recorded and had the possibility of ending up on the new magazine shows for millions and millions to see. Over 8 million people watch ET every night.
Oh and your correct...i am backing out of this thread aswell. This would make a great SNL skit though along with the IMUS thread :lol: So over the top ignorant that you just have to sit back and f*ckin laugh your ass off while your clickin the X button :lol: :lol: :lol: ...:wavey:If true, then his narrow behind should be fired. No ifs, ands, or buts. :tape:

meyerpl
Apr 13th, 2007, 08:33 AM
I agree with you 100% about how repulsive that is. My point being is that an injustice committed against ANY HUMAN BEING should outrage and anger you. I implore and BEG you to open your heart more. I understand what you are saying. I don't want to yell at you or judge but I have been persecuted, discriminated against, physically bashed and fired from jobs for being a gay man. I know what it feels like to be excluded. But NOBODY, NOBODY deserves what happened to those Duke lacrosse players. Same thing applies for the many black people wrongfully accused and imprisoned. This world is so full of hurt and needs healing. :sad:
Excellent post.
I don't know who "owes" whom an apology or what punishment is fitting for any given transgression, but there is absolute moral clarity in your words. It is sad, very sad, when people's hearts, for whatever reasons, become so injured or hardened that they aren't capable of empathizing with other people because of race, religion, sexual orientation, etc. and cannot feel outrage for injustices against all people.

Kunal
Apr 13th, 2007, 09:03 AM
i didnt know bout the duke players angle

treufreund
Apr 13th, 2007, 09:27 AM
Excellent post.
I don't know who "owes" whom an apology or what punishment is fitting for any given transgression, but there is absolute moral clarity in your words. It is sad, very sad, when people's hearts, for whatever reasons, become so injured or hardened that they aren't capable of empathizing with other people because of race, religion, sexual orientation, etc. and cannot feel outrage for injustices against all people.


Thanks. Nice to know someone is reading what I wrote. :)

griffin
Apr 13th, 2007, 01:54 PM
. I, for one, as a gay man still feel quite a bit of anger and still feel very much like discrimination against people in my community is more tolerated or excused. Sadly, if I point that out, some people think I am in the wrong for doing so.:sad:

I, for one, as a lesbian who has spent the last 10 years of my life working for one of the groups fighting discrimination against our community, would like to point out that trying to shift the subject in situations like this is neither appropriate nor productive.

It is no more helpful for you to say "yeah, but why is it still ok for someone to say '******' and discriminate against gay people" in this situation than it is for others to say "yea, but why is it still ok for someone to say the n-word and perpetuate racism" when someone says or does something homophobic and nasty. (or "why is it ok to discriminate against blacks/gays but Mel Gibson gets raked over the coals...")

It will not further the cause of lgbt rights, it will not make people more willing to listen when we say "this is wrong" or engage in dialog.

The fact is there's all kinds of bigotry and ugliness out there. Some obvious, some quite insidious. Saying "yeah, but why aren't you offended by ugly" when nasty happens doesn't get ugly taken seriously, it only lets the perpetrators of nasty off the hook by shifting the focus.

You want people to look outside their own interests? Prove to them you're capabl of looking outside your own.

Pureracket
Apr 13th, 2007, 03:14 PM
Al Sharpton never said these guys were guilty. He wanted the case to be investigated. The NAACP and leaders in Durham were admirable. They made sure that the neighborhood let the justice system work but of course you and your side kicks have chosen to ignore that. :rolleyes: Typical.:worship::worship::worship::worship::worsh ip:

Not once did Jackson, Sharpton, or the NAACP say that these men were guilty. They were simply advocating for justice. Of course, swam ignores that.

samsung101
Apr 13th, 2007, 03:43 PM
I love it.

Only the right has 'morons'. Did Keith Olberman pass out the list?

Or was that Chris Matthews latest e-mail blast? Daily Kos is right
on top of the job....minute by minute postings............back in 1993,
he said this, no, she said that........we have the hate list on parade!



Can we please get a list of the hateful, racist, sick things the
Left pundits and hosts have said.....oh wait, they dont' keep
that list.

They never say anything even remotely bad. They're too diverse and
tolerant to ever do that. Sure.

If censorship is what the left needs to keep power and get power,
that doesn't say much about their message. In order to spread the
word, which is already done w/the indoctrination in the public school
system, monopoloy on Hollywood and films and music, and the hold
it has over most public television.....the left with the govt. now wants
to censor the speech allowed on the airwaves...but, only of some.


Under George W. Bush, and the Republican era in Congress, the airwaves
expanded...the public television sources increased....tv and radio and
internet grew. Freedom of speech grew. It did not decrease. Censorship
is almost non-existent. The marketplace kept an eye on things. In the
end, we did see a growth in raunchy tv. But, we also saw a growth in
a public discourse with bloggers and news sites on the internet and satellite
and HD, etc.

With an administration led by Democrats, I guarantee you we will see
a new censorship that is aimed at cleaning up the opposition....things they
don't like, out.

Air America doesn't disturb me. I don't mind if Sean Penn or Rosie are on the
air. I don't watch them. I don't like them. But, it's a free country. I can
live with it. Andrew Sullivan can blog and talk away. It's fine w/me. His
words do not hinder my thought.

The 'thought police' are a problem to me. I don't want the govt., under
the mask of selective morality, telling me what I can hear on tv or the
radio short of 4 letter words and nudity on network tv and radio.



Evidently, the left can't handle a Rush or Laura or Michelle Malkin in their
smaller, and yet popular, public outlets.

Amazing, guess the left doesn't think much of itself afterall.

Imus was fired for the color of green, not black.

samsung101
Apr 13th, 2007, 03:49 PM
'Advocating for justice'?

Seriously. You buy that.

They flamed the fires of a local issue into a national issue, and
made sure they more than insinuated the three men, the school,
the community were white, rich, and guilty of a crime against
a black woman.



All without caring what they were doing was based on false
charges.

By the way, I hold many cable news stations accountable as
well. They failed to dig for information on the case, and only
went with what the figures were saying, like Sharpton and
Jackson and the NAACP head.


It's the traditional racial shakedown for cash.
The Democratic Party made sure they were down there too,
using it as a springboard for the state campaigns. See, we care!
The other side doesn't. Give us your money, give us your vote.



They made money off of this as well.

Rainbow Coaltion, Push, NAACP,Sharpton's groups all had
mailers out promoting this issue, and asking for donations.

They owe the young men an apology for jumping to conclusions,
making it a racial issue, when it wasn't, and creating a scene
that did not allow for justice to happen in a timely manner.

Where do the three young men go to get their lives back?

Will Oprah invite them on tv to discuss the injustice done to them?

Will Al Sharpton have them on his radio show?

Sharpton and Jackson say anything they want a year ago to
inject themselves into the fake rape case at Duke, without
recourse...much like the fake Tawana Brawley case...and
there they are again flaming the Imus case.

At least, Imus apologized profusely, met with the women, and
will spend the rest of his life paying for a mistake. Sharpton and
Jackson won't, they'll make more money off of it.

Serendy Willick
Apr 14th, 2007, 07:26 AM
Do you know HOW MANY black men were falsey incarcerated for being FALSELY convicted of raping white women. For those who didn't die in prision and were able to be exonerated because of DNA, they have yet to recieve an apology from any white person who put them in jail (and believe me, almost all of these men were tired by white judges and prosecutors). When that happenes to the 4 black men in Chicago who were weeks away from being executed for a rape and murder of a white woman which they didn't commit, the black man in the Bronx who was just let out of jail for a rape he didn't commit and the two black men in Texas, who were exonerated for rapes against white people they didn't commit, then I will feel outrage for these three young men, but until that day happens, no can do.

AMEN. Have the decendents of the people whose lives were ruined by the massacre at Rosewood, Florida( the mostly African-American town that was BURNED DOWN due to fake rape allegations by a WHITE WOMAN.) received any apology? Have the numerous, numerous MEN OF COLOR who had to spend 20 to 30 years (or in earlier years, lynched) in prison due to fake rape allegetions by WHITE WOMEN received any apology? Have the family of Emmit Till (the young man who was savagely beaten and killed by racist due to fake allegations that he "whistled" at a white woman) recieved an apology? These boys didnt have to spend 24 hours in jail:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: and had Fox "Republican" news, Dan Abrams, 60 mins, and every other white news organization backing them from day one:rolleyes:

meyerpl
Apr 14th, 2007, 12:20 PM
Apparently, the sins of the past justify the sins of the present. One wrong does justify another. I understand how some people feel, but the boys in the Duke Lacrosse case never prosecuted an innocent man or lynched anyone.

Look, I'm sick about people villifying the accuser in the Duke Lacrosse case, publishing her name, picture and suggesting that she should be arrested and sued. No court of law or legitimate authority has concluded that she lied. The prosecutor concluded that the evidence doesn't support the charges. The prosecutor went on to make some public statements about this case that I think were inappropriate, implying that the boys did nothing wrong. That is not how our criminal justice system works. There is always a presumption of innocence, but in a system designed to let 10 guilty men go free rather than convict one innocent man, (abeit a flawed system), there is no determination of innocence when charges are dropped or declaration of innocence with a not-guilty verdict.

So, the boys go free because the evidence doesn't support the charge. That does NOT mean the alleged victim is now the accused and a penalty needs to be extracted. What message does that send to rape victims? With respect to the difficulty of proving sexual assault beyond a reasonable doubt in such a system, what does it tell rape victims when we go after, badger and threaten a woman who came forward with an allegation? Roughly 30% of sexual assaults are reported now. Do we want to see that number drop to 10%?

This woman may or may not be a liar and opportunist; we don't know. But there is a much bigger picture to consider. Furthermore, I don't know whether Sharpton and/or Jackson owe the young men an apology, but if they don't, it's NOT because of "how many black men were falsley incarcerated for being falsely convicted of raping white women". That's a tragedy we'll be living with long after the Duke Lacrosse matter is long forgotten, but I don't think it's relevant or should guide anyone's moral compass with regard to this case.

mykarma
Apr 15th, 2007, 06:37 PM
I love that Don Imus already has a new job. :lol: People thought his life would be ruined now but this will all blow over, just like Mel Gibson's ho-hum controversy. Racists like Sharpon and Jackson carry no weight with the majority of intelligent Americans who have learned to ignore their predictable race-baiting. :)
Guess that leaves you out. :rolleyes:

Apoleb
Apr 15th, 2007, 07:22 PM
It is about free speech.

Offensive and ugly and racist speech is sadly, free speech.

I don't like flags being burned. But, I don't want it oulawed.

I don't like rap music. But, I don't want that censored.

I don't care for Air America, but, it should be on the air.

I don't like what Imus said, but, he shouldn't lose his show
because of an error - especially, when he is being over backwards
to apologize and make amends any way he can.


Removing Imus from his job wasn't a breach of legal free speech, you idiot. Comparing this to legal censorship or the banning of free speech is crazy. Don Imus can still publish his views about female black women or say them wherever he wants, and he won't be prosecuted. MSNBC is a private company that tries to reach the mainstream, so ofcourse when their employees don't conform to the companie's policies they would be kicked out (just like any company), especially when they say racist slurs. Just like NBC fired one of their journalist for giving a very negative opinion on the Iraq war, something I'm sure you don't object to. (http://english.people.com.cn/200304/01/eng20030401_114341.shtml) It's called capitalism, something you cherish so much, but apparently know very little of.

Apoleb
Apr 15th, 2007, 07:41 PM
I love it.

Only the right has 'morons'. Did Keith Olberman pass out the list?

Or was that Chris Matthews latest e-mail blast? Daily Kos is right
on top of the job....minute by minute postings............back in 1993,
he said this, no, she said that........we have the hate list on parade!



Can we please get a list of the hateful, racist, sick things the
Left pundits and hosts have said.....oh wait, they dont' keep
that list.

They never say anything even remotely bad. They're too diverse and
tolerant to ever do that. Sure.

If censorship is what the left needs to keep power and get power,
that doesn't say much about their message. In order to spread the
word, which is already done w/the indoctrination in the public school
system, monopoloy on Hollywood and films and music, and the hold
it has over most public television.....the left with the govt. now wants
to censor the speech allowed on the airwaves...but, only of some.


Under George W. Bush, and the Republican era in Congress, the airwaves
expanded...the public television sources increased....tv and radio and
internet grew. Freedom of speech grew. It did not decrease. Censorship
is almost non-existent. The marketplace kept an eye on things. In the
end, we did see a growth in raunchy tv. But, we also saw a growth in
a public discourse with bloggers and news sites on the internet and satellite
and HD, etc.

With an administration led by Democrats, I guarantee you we will see
a new censorship that is aimed at cleaning up the opposition....things they
don't like, out.

Air America doesn't disturb me. I don't mind if Sean Penn or Rosie are on the
air. I don't watch them. I don't like them. But, it's a free country. I can
live with it. Andrew Sullivan can blog and talk away. It's fine w/me. His
words do not hinder my thought.

The 'thought police' are a problem to me. I don't want the govt., under
the mask of selective morality, telling me what I can hear on tv or the
radio short of 4 letter words and nudity on network tv and radio.



Evidently, the left can't handle a Rush or Laura or Michelle Malkin in their
smaller, and yet popular, public outlets.

Amazing, guess the left doesn't think much of itself afterall.

Imus was fired for the color of green, not black.

Wow. You have zero understanding of how freedom of expression operates, and what capitalism is and its consequences. Quite ironic since it's coming from someone who is supposedly bent on defending "American values."

"
The 'thought police' are a problem to me. I don't want the govt., under
the mask of selective morality, telling me what I can hear on tv or the
radio short of 4 letter words and nudity on network tv and radio.
"

Please explain the role of the government in this. Did it force MSNBC to fire him? Did it issue a law that says no racial slurs should be aired on TV. Did the FCC fine MSNBC? Please enlighten us. Or maybe do you advocate a law that regulates private companies and forces them not to fire those who come against their policies? :tape: So much for free market policies and fiscal conservatism, eh? For the record though, it was the Republicans who supported an FCC fine (thus a regulation of free expression by a governmental agency) when Janet Jackson showed a breast on TV. Selective morality anyone? :tape:

Vlover
Apr 15th, 2007, 08:43 PM
[QUOTE]I love that Don Imus already has a new job. :lol: People thought his life would be ruined now but this will all blow over,

You missed the larger issue here buddy. One of the key things Imus said to the Rutgers team was I'm not fighting for my job but for my life. Therefore he recognized that its about CHARACTER and no amount of money can buy a good one. He has a track record and its ugly and nasty and will always be associated with such for life. I think he would gladly pay money for the class the Rutgers team displayed if he could.

RVD
Apr 15th, 2007, 11:50 PM
I love that Don Imus already has a new job. :lol: People thought his life would be ruined now but this will all blow over, just like Mel Gibson's ho-hum controversy. Racists like Sharpon and Jackson carry no weight with the majority of intelligent Americans who have learned to ignore their predictable race-baiting. :)WOW!!
Did you purposely miss the essence of what transpired? Did you actually believe that the 'principle' topics or ideas aren't so much Imus himself, but racism in general? Or did you chime in just to demonstrate once again how ignorant you can really be?

See here's what you're missing buddy...
* The nation...no, the world... now realizes [even further] that America's dirty little secret is still alive and kicking...but will no longer be tolerated as it once was.
* The FCC will more likely be energized to get off its worthless ass [though I doubt it] and start regulating the radio ways properly.
* Those many many apologists of Imus are now known.
* ...and the least of what will result is that Imus himself will most certainly be careful in what emerges from that racist maw of his in the future.

So the next time you decide to offer open your own maw, be aware that others like myself will rebuttal in kind.

RVD
Apr 15th, 2007, 11:53 PM
[QUOTE=tangerine_dream;10530187]

You missed the larger issue here buddy. One of the key things Imus said to the Rutgers team was I'm not fighting for my job but for my life. Therefore he recognized that its about CHARACTER and no amount of money can buy a good one. He has a track record and its ugly and nasty and will always be associated with such for life. I think he would gladly pay money for the class the Rutgers team displayed if he could.Oops...pardon me Vlover. You had already taken care of this silly poster.:lol:
*respectfully bows out*
Still, this level of ignorance is soooo irritating.

Apoleb
Apr 15th, 2007, 11:59 PM
* The FCC will more likely be energized to get off its worthless ass [though I doubt it] and start regulating the radio ways properly.


I disagree with this. The fact that he lost his job and that most people turned out against him and he had to apologize shows that we don't need governmental regulation to punish racists. In the many cases where the government intervenes, racists try to play the victim card of free speech and even get sympathy. Let them speak their mind, and let them know that their idiocy will not go unnoticed.

RVD
Apr 16th, 2007, 01:08 AM
I disagree with this. The fact that he lost his job and that most people turned out against him and he had to apologize shows that we don't need governmental regulation to punish racists. In the many cases where the government intervenes, racists try to play the victim card of free speech and even get sympathy. Let them speak their mind, and let them know that their idiocy will not go unnoticed.I understand your point Apoleb, but are you suggesting that we drop their radio communication regulatory responsibilities? It's part of why I pay taxes to these bozos. :shrug:
They are very active in how they regulate TV content? Why not what's deemed offensive on the radio as well?

HippityHop
Apr 16th, 2007, 01:31 AM
I don't understand why Imus is being characterized as a conservative. :confused: His show was one of the biggest showcases for liberal democrats in the country.

The man is simply offensive to everybody and has been for a long time.

Apoleb
Apr 16th, 2007, 01:37 AM
I understand your point Apoleb, but are you suggesting that we drop their radio communication regulatory responsibilities? It's part of why I pay taxes to these bozos. :shrug:
They are very active in how they regulate TV content? Why not what's deemed offensive on the radio as well?

I don't know about the specifics of TV regulation, but I read the FCC statement and they said that racial slurs are protected unfer the first amendment and the right for free speech. So I think it goes for TV, radio or any media outlet. (http://www.reuters.com/article/governmentFilingsNews/idUSN1238793720070413)
I don't object to that, because experience has shown in Europe that banning racist speech won't do anything, and if anything, it's taken by racists as an excuse to play the victim card and get more sympathy. Racist slurs are publically banned in France, and everyone knows that Le Pen and the National Front are racists but they just don't spell it out, yet he's getting 15% in term of popularity for the presidential polls, while Sarkozy, the leader among the candidates is in the 20s. I think this case has shown that society will harshly condemn racism even though it tolerates its existence. This will only make racism even more unpopular.

clementine
Apr 16th, 2007, 03:31 AM
:wavey: Some interesting articles about race and double standards. It'll be interesting to see how many neg reps I get out of this one. :lol:

Racial remarks: Double standard?
Blacks and whites disagree on why Imus’s ‘ho’ comment was so offensive
April 12, 2007

Is there a double standard? Imus has been suspended for two weeks for racist and sexist remarks, but rap songs and African-American comedians use the same kind of language and no one bats an eye.

What gives?

“There’s a double, double standard,” the Rev. Dr. DeForest Soaries, pastor of the First Baptist Church of Lincoln Gardens in Somerset, N.J., told Matt Lauer on TODAY. “If Don Imus had called the wife of a CBS executive an ugly whore he’d have been fired.”

But, a young African-American man told TODAY correspondent Kerry Sanders on the street in Miami: “If a black talk show host said it, there wouldn’t have been any controversy whatever.”

“Those terms didn’t originate in the white community,” Imus himself has said in defending himself. “Those terms originated in the black community.”

Many black leaders agree. They aren’t excusing what Imus said about the Rutgers women’s basketball team, but they do contend that this incident calls for a more serious examination of America’s attitudes about race and women.

“The society is what it is because of those in leadership roles,” Rutgers women’s coach C. Vivian Stringer told Meredith Vieira on TODAY. Referring to Imus and his they-said-if-first defense, she added, “He is three times the age of a rapper. If we don’t set the example, there can’t be a return to real decency. It starts with each one of us and what we do. As much as I would love to win a national championship, I would gladly exchange a national championship in order for there to be a better America.”

‘It’s a historic problem’

From Spike Lee movies like “School Daze” to Jay-Z to Chris Rock, pop African-American culture is drenched in the sort of language that Imus used — and more. Dr. Beverly Daniel Tatum of Spelman College, historically a college for black women, said that when her students travel abroad, they find that foreigners think the words many Americans find so offensive are the common — and harmless — terms used to describe women and blacks in this country.

Tatum is the author of the book “Can We Talk about Race?” “It’s an historic problem, But one that all of us must address,” she said of America’s double standard. Imus’ comments and subsequent two-week suspension, she said, present “a wonderful opportunity to have dialogue. Our society is increasingly polarized; our schools are increasingly isolated. I do think it’s important to recognize that these comments are unacceptable” no matter what the source.

“If we are to have a civil society, we need a consensus on what decency and civility really mean,” said Soaries, who is Coach Stringer’s pastor and who has been asked to moderate an upcoming meeting between Imus and the Rutger’s women’s team.

Philadelphia radio talk-show host Michael Smerconish agreed, though he added that the Rev. Al Sharpton and the Rev. Jesse Jackson are hardly the persons to lead it. Both, he said, are guilty of the same sort of offenses they accuse Imus of.

“It’s a dialogue about cleaning up culture in all respects,” Smerconish told Lauer, pointing to such shows as “Jackass” as another example of an anything-goes attitude. “There’s enough hypocrisy to go around.”

Stringer, appearing on TODAY with Rutger’s women’s basketball team captain Essence Carson, talked about what a remarkable story her team should have been. It was an underdog squad of just 10 young women that upset mighty Duke and fought its way into the National Championship game, where it finally succumbed to a powerful Tennessee team.

It’s players, said Carson, a junior music major, aspire to be doctors, psychologists, musicians and orthopedic surgeons. At the highest moment of their athletic lives, they heard themselves dismissed by Imus as “nappy-headed ho’s.”

“It’s just so hurtful that he has attacked 10 young student athletes who are not only basketball players but also students,” Carson said.
Double standard hurts more than slurs
by Frank Beckmann

Who should be fired over the use of the n-word? It's a legitimate question in the controversy over talk radio host Don Imus' derogatory description of the Rutgers women's basketball team.

You will find the word on the radio -- no, not on Imus' program -- all day long. It is sprinkled in the lyrics of rap songs that rank among the top 10 on the charts along with other language demeaning to women.

Imus has paid a steep price; he was fired Thursday. But why aren't record and radio executives subject to similar sanctions for regularly featuring songs that have been blamed for leading to disrespect of women, a "gangsta" mentality among youth, and crime?

There is the great double standard at work. Social commentators wish to decry racism and segregation, but then turn a deaf ear to the very messages that help create the problems.

Where is the line drawn for Imus and others on words that hurt African-Americans when blacks accept such language as routine?

Even more puzzling is the outrage over a single offensive comment, while the hip-hop degraders go unpunished.

Supposed leaders like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson make well-publicized, self-aggrandizing appearances during any perceived controversial incident -- see the Duke lacrosse story -- but have failed to attack the root causes of so much despair.

You won't find Sharpton or Jackson at the Hip-Hop Summit in Detroit at the Max Fisher Music Center Saturday, protesting one of the featured stars Mike Jones, who raps about "hos." That's the contradiction, or double standard, that harms race relations, doing more real damage than the words of any shock jock ever could.

The Duke lacrosse case offers another example. Three Duke University students, all lacrosse players, are finally free of criminal charges, wrongly pursued against them by a self-serving prosecutor whose actions were encouraged by pressure from Sharpton, Jackson and their supporters.

This trio endured true suffering from false accusations (the North Carolina attorney general even went further and declared them "innocent"). Their families were forced to spend a reported $3 million in legal fees to defend them.

All the while, we heard the cries of racism against the three, and listened to the divisive mantra about how these supposedly privileged students were running out of control. They were all convicted in the court of public opinion thanks to that misplaced public outcry.

Benjamin Chavis-Muhammad, the former NAACP leader and organizer of the Hip-Hop Summit, told me, "I caution people about wanting to be the judge, the jury and the executioner. Everybody wants to get their vengeance on something."

But the same people who joined in the false accusations against the Duke players won't seek any vengeance on their behalf. They have now moved on to the next cause celebre and have a different trophy to place on their mantel.

Meantime, the music plays on.
Duke injustice fails to provoke anger Imus did
By Bernie Miklasz
ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH

Any discussion of race in America invariably leads to frustration and a profound feeling of futility. It's virtually impossible to have a meaningful dialogue on the subject.

While not exactly defending Don Imus' unprovoked, racist and sexist insults directed at the women's basketball team at Rutgers, some of my white friends have attempted to rationalize the comments by redirecting the conversation in the most predictable of diversions: changing the topic.

Instead of dealing specifically with Imus, they'll cite race-based insults hurled by black comedians and athletes. In other words, if Chris Rock makes fun of whites (or blacks) in a stand-up comedy routine, or if Charles Barkley says something silly on TNT, somehow this means Imus gets a free pass.

Hardly. Wrong is wrong, but context is important. When a comedian speaks in humorous generalities about the differences between races, that's considerably different from Imus spontaneously slurring a specific group of people such as the Rutgers players, who have names, faces, identities and families.

The anger directed at Imus is on target. Sure, the piling on from discredited figures such as Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson is absurd, but that doesn't excuse what Imus did.

We're quick to leap and uphold the honor of the Rutgers women by beating up on Imus. But I'm just wondering: Where is the outrage over the blatant injustice endured by three members of Duke's men's lacrosse team?

The three players were formally accused of rape and other trumped-up charges that finally got tossed away on Wednesday by the North Carolina attorney general, Roy Cooper, who held nothing back in criticizing this as a shoddy, shameless and baseless prosecution.

But these Duke players will always be stained by the mud of these false allegations. Before any of the facts came in, these players were essentially deemed guilty by the Duke administration, the local Durham, N.C., community, and the national media. So how do they get their good names back?

I want to know why the angry forces, white and black, that mobilized to take Imus down aren't heading to Durham, N.C. to condemn the despicable wrongdoing that threatened the very freedom of the Duke players. Is this because they're white males who come from affluent backgrounds? It shouldn't matter; they are still victims.

Early on in this process, the New Black Panthers, a black hate group from Atlanta, traveled to Durham and made threats against the three lacrosse players. And the woman who filed the false charges against the Duke players is black. So how come Sharpton and Jackson aren't in North Carolina, speaking out against blacks who harmed the reputation of three white athletes? Must be a selective conscience. And the double standards are detestable.

I'm not playing down what happened to the Rutgers women. But they were victims of name-calling from a worn-out shock jock. And I believe that some good is coming out of this for Rutgers; because of the publicity, we've gotten an opportunity to learn a lot more about the players. And they're an impressive lineup that includes an aspiring doctor, a future veterinarian, an accomplished musician, an actual Girl Scout, and strong academic backgrounds. Coach Vivian Stringer, a member of the basketball Hall of Fame, was widowed 15 years ago and raised three kids on her own — including a wheelchair-bound daughter born with spinal bifida.

Just about anyone who saw the Rutgers coach and players speak at length Tuesday would come away thinking that this would be a great team to be a part of. By calling them a bad name, Imus gave the world a chance to discover just how wonderful these players truly are.

And the three Duke players? Well, they'll get on with their lives, except that the word "rapist" will follow them forever. And I ask again: Where is the outrage?

Bacardi
Apr 16th, 2007, 03:38 AM
There is a double standard in America today. But Imus made his statements for no good reason, just because the ladies team was being successful. Sharpton only made his statements, which were false after it was already in the media attention and people had begun tearing these young men apart.

So do I think there is a double standard in America? Yes, absolutely. However I don't think it really pertains to this issue. Because it was 2 separate incidents happening to different athletes of race and sex. Blame the media if you want to blame anyone. But I will say a lot of times Sharpton and Jackson do suffer from foot in mouth disease, and play the race card an awful lot. Still with America changing in 100 more years it's going to be the fair skinned race that is the minority and roles will be reversed so we'll see a reversal of the race cards use. Not saying I agree with this, but I'm just making an observation.

RVD
Apr 16th, 2007, 07:53 AM
I don't know about the specifics of TV regulation, but I read the FCC statement and they said that racial slurs are protected unfer the first amendment and the right for free speech. So I think it goes for TV, radio or any media outlet. (http://www.reuters.com/article/governmentFilingsNews/idUSN1238793720070413)
I don't object to that, because experience has shown in Europe that banning racist speech won't do anything, and if anything, it's taken by racists as an excuse to play the victim card and get more sympathy. Racist slurs are publically banned in France, and everyone knows that Le Pen and the National Front are racists but they just don't spell it out, yet he's getting 15% in term of popularity for the presidential polls, while Sarkozy, the leader among the candidates is in the 20s. I think this case has shown that society will harshly condemn racism even though it tolerates its existence. This will only make racism even more unpopular.You know what...
I do believe that you are correct; which scares me even more.
...uh, that is, not your being correct, but that racial slurs are protected under the First Amendment. :lol:

Incidentally, it's has been getting a might ugly out there in Europe as of recent. :scared:

esquímaux
Apr 16th, 2007, 09:31 AM
From the looks of this thread, it seems like white people pay more attention to Sharpton than black people do.*DEAD* @ how you put the strike out on Clijsters in your signature :lol: :p:crying2::sad:

samsung101
Apr 16th, 2007, 06:28 PM
I dont' want the Congress or the mainstream media to create that
'line' they don't want crossed.

Leave that to us, the public, to decide. The market can decide,
and it does well.

I don't like rap music. Don't like the terms used in a lot of rap music
for women and blacks and whites, etc.

But, I don't want it silenced either.
I don't want the govt. controlling what I can buy or hear on free airwaves.

We as consumers and citizens need to display more discretion and
choice, not hand that right over to politicians.

If we're going to fire a man for a mistake in a racial phrase, and reward
others with millions and praise for the same racial phrase in another
context...we're not doing anything but silencing public discourse.

Imus is an old radio guy with modest ratings at best, and yet, the left
shut him down.

Whose words and actions have more cultural impact short and long term?
Don Imus in the waning days of his career, or popular rap singers at the
top of the charts?




The left wants to silence dissenters. The left would like to
regain the monopoly it had on the media and information it
had for decades. A few dents from Fox and AM talk radio have
scared the left enough to want to silence it any way it can.

Make no mistake about it, the Left want to silence the Rush,
Laura, Al Rantels, Larry Elders, Sean Hannity, Michelle Malkin,
Ann Coulters of the world....by cherry picking their words.

All the while ignoring the hatred and venom spewed on the left
radio shows.....towards the right or white men or Christians or
Liebermans or John Howards.

samsung101
Apr 16th, 2007, 06:32 PM
Again, which party is eager to make your media and information
choices smaller and more defined (with definitions made by them),
and which is eager to let the market grow freely, with little govt.
intrusion?

Again, who made Al Sharpton (Tawana Brawley fake rape case
scandal) and Jesse Jackson (hymie town) the national moral
compass team for what we can hear and see and get on the
airwaves? No thank you.

Apoleb
Apr 16th, 2007, 06:36 PM
The market can decide,
and it does well.


Shut up then, cause that's what the market did this time. You don't know what you want to critisize and constantly contradict yourself. There's nothing to suggest that the left (i.e the Dems) want to regulate free speech on the media from this case. MSNBC took a decision purely based on economics and the fact that society won't let racial slurs go unnoticed. That's capitalism. You're just mad that a bigot like you was fired from his position for making blatant racist attacks, and want something to critisize so you can put that negative energy somewhere.

Why I'm bother with a zombie though, I don't know. :shrug:

samsung101
Apr 16th, 2007, 06:37 PM
A private company can fire an employee. That's what MSNBC and
CBS radio did. Fine. It was pushed along by political pressure, which
pushed the sponsors.

But, listen to what Sharpton and others are saying - they have
their list ready with other things they want taken 'care of'.

In fact, Sharpton went on to say, 'this is only the beginning', of
what is acceptable on the airwaves.

Amazingly, shockingly, their mouthpieces like Olberman only list
comments they deem offensive (taken out of context) from the
right....nothing from the left.

My point is that yes, there is a move to use govt. to silence
the right, and reinforce the antiquated Fairness Doctrine............

This is 2007, not 1967.

Mrs. Peel
Apr 16th, 2007, 06:40 PM
:lol: at some of you who are so 'bothered' by Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton. You will need to look a little deeper for that issue because I can tell you, I hate seeing them on my TV. They are not my 'leaders'. :lol: Many blacks feel the same. Stop being so naive.

Do you think IMUS got fired because of these two :lol:. You'd like to believe that wouldn't you? :rolleyes: I didn't listen to much that Al Sharpton had to say about the issue, frankly, he grates. I did listen to that schmuck Imus and he and his big mouth hammered the last nail in his own coffin.

Who cares if he got another job? Are you saying that people should be shocked? Any one with a teaspoon of brains could have figured out that he would go to satellite radio, just now people have to pay to listen to his crap. :shrug:That bloated scum Rush Limbaugh is still employed and he is a professed drug addict. His so called conservative listenership decided to hang on to him because there isn't anyone who spews hate like he does. Who cares if he is a stinking hypocrite. If there is a place for him on the ariwaves, there is one for Imus.

And frankly, maybe these Duke Lacrosse players will think twice about subjugating black women for their pleasure. There are plenty of white women who would be willing to take their clothes off for them. I bet none of these guys woud ask a normal black woman out for a date. I don't feel anything for thses fuckers either. Get falsely accused of rape? Shit happens, these days. At least they weren't dragged from the back of a car and hung from a tree. Emmett Till, anyone? Fuck, the Lacrosse players.

samsung101
Apr 16th, 2007, 06:41 PM
If it was only about the market, it would be fine.

It isn't.

CBS and NBC also pay millions to rappers who use the 'n' word and
'h' word and every other ugly word they can muster up....and yet
fired Imus for the same words in comical context. Wrong as it was
to use the words at all in his case - which it was.

Follow the actions of Sharpton, Jackson, NAACP, Congress on this....
it's not about Imus alone.

Who gets to draw the line in 2007 when we have 24/7 information
available to us? Who gets to decide what's on the internet? Don't
think for one second, Congress won't try to censor the internet as well.


Don't agree. Shut up! That's fine prose.

That's what I love about the tolerant and diversified Left... silence
anything that disagrees w/you.

roarke
Apr 16th, 2007, 06:55 PM
Two totally different issue. Imus comments and Al comments are coming for two different. Al Sharpton didn't round up those three dudes and call a press conference out of nowhere and accuse them of rape, (which they probably are quilty of anyway), he responded to a dcumented court case period where these guys were being prosecuted for rape. He has no need for an apologize at the same level of Imus. On the other hand like so many neo-conservative bullshit talking heads, he was deliberate in his insult. Of course he should apologize, he should also be fined, fired and barred from the air waves. I am sick of white American sitting on the back of black America and expect us not to bitch and complain about it. Well guess what while you are trying to suck the life out of the whole word please not that human rights and equitable treatment does not belong to you alone. You can't keep doing things like this and expect to simply wave it away with a simply apology. Everyone throws out all their insults daily against black people daily and expect our anger to be calmed with a few fake apologies. Also people keep saying Imus wasn't a bad man, he was really is a good person well guess what.. I am sure Hitler and Stalin had people in their corner rooting for their goodness as well.

Vlover
Apr 16th, 2007, 07:09 PM
[QUOTE]I don't know about the specifics of TV regulation, but I read the FCC statement and they said that racial slurs are protected unfer the first amendment and the right for free speech. So I think it goes for TV, radio or any media outlet.

You are correct that racial slurs are protected under the 1st amendment but the difference is that you don't have the right to express them over the public airwaves that are broadcasted by priviately owned and run companies.

The F- word and other "indecent" langauage is not allowed in certain venues regulated by the FCC therefore racial slurs should also be included. If people want to pay their money to entertain that sort of thing let them pay their money and enjoy it but at least give those of us who want to listen or watch public tv should be given the courtesy. Also for those companies who don't want to tolerate or associate with people who use racial slurs they should be free to fire them.

Apoleb
Apr 16th, 2007, 07:11 PM
Oh, I feel kinda honored. :haha: From my experience, I think this is the first time that Samsung responds to specifically one person.


If it was only about the market, it would be fine.

It isn't.

CBS and NBC also pay millions to rappers who use the 'n' word and
'h' word and every other ugly word they can muster up....and yet
fired Imus for the same words in comical context. Wrong as it was
to use the words at all in his case - which it was.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalism

Again, you show a complete lack of understanding of what the free market is. As long as the government doesn't regulate, the decisions of private companies can only be motivated by their interests (pursue of profit). In this case, because of the general outrage, MSNBC saw it right to fire that guy to preserve its reputation, especially that it tackles the mainstream. Rap is completely irrelevent to the fact that the government had nothing to do with is, and that comparing this case to a legal ban of free speech is idiotic at best.

Don't agree. Shut up! That's fine prose.

That's what I love about the tolerant and diversified Left... silence
anything that disagrees w/you.

Hey! I'm the one arguing here that racist speech shouldn't be regulated by the government, and that media private companies have the right to take the decisions they see apt. :lol: So "left" doesn't work well for you here. And I respect a lot of people who disagree with me. But bigots and those who don't know what they're talking about SHOULD shut up, though.

roarke
Apr 16th, 2007, 07:12 PM
I love that Don Imus already has a new job. :lol: People thought his life would be ruined now but this will all blow over, just like Mel Gibson's ho-hum controversy. Racists like Sharpon and Jackson carry no weight with the majority of intelligent Americans who have learned to ignore their predictable race-baiting. :)

Here we have it people, yet another one who sees nothing worng in subjugating black people under the guise of free speech and shock-jock theology while gloating. Nice spin I hope it eases what little conscience you may still have!

*JR*
Apr 17th, 2007, 12:56 PM
Without defending Imus in the slightest, he just said yet another offensive thing, and this time paid a stiff price for it. DA Nifong tried to put 3 kids in jail for up to 30 years, refusing to even look @ the evidence that would have cleared them. Its hard to compare the severity of the two things.

roarke
Apr 17th, 2007, 01:37 PM
Apr 17th, 2007 06:14 AM sophieshihtzu you are a racist.

Why thank you very much dog girl. If defending myself against the overwhelming dishonor been heaped on me daily makes me a racist and you feel the need to expel more hate against me than maybe when you type your next post take a look in the mirror, it might just tell you more about who you relly are!