BS: Don Imus replacment

Subject: RE: BS: Don Imus replacment
From: beardedbruce
Date: 17 Apr 07 - 08:51 AM

Washington Post:

The Ills Behind That Slur

By E. J. Dionne Jr.
Tuesday, April 17, 2007; Page A21

Why is it that I am experiencing a terrible bout of cynicism watching all the post-Imus hand-wringing?

It's certainly not that I have any personal stake in Don Imus's firing. I never appeared on his show. I'm not being self-righteous. I was never invited. And that was a relief. I don't think I could have handled Imus.

Nor do I have a problem with his being fired. My heroine in this controversy is my old friend and colleague Gwen Ifill, of whom Imus said when she was assigned to the White House beat in 1993 by the New York Times: "Isn't the Times wonderful? It lets the cleaning lady cover the White House." He survived that, partly because Ifill moved on to greater things.

Ifill got at the essence of what was wrong with Imus's racist and sexist words about members of the Rutgers women's basketball team when she wrote last week in the Times, scorning "people who cannot grasp the notion of picking on people their own size." Ifill did not call for Imus's firing, but he was cooked by her essential point: that the Rutgers women should not be rewarded for their "grit, hard work and courage" by getting called ugly names on the radio. It's good that African Americans have more influence now than they did when Imus demeaned Ifill 14 years ago.

Finally, I have no use for the degrading aspects of a rap culture that has popularized slurs against African Americans and women -- and this despite my teenage son's occasionally successful efforts to get me to understand hip-hop.

Back in 1995, I wrote in praise of the late C. Dolores Tucker, a longtime Democratic Party activist, for her alliance with conservative Bill Bennett against misogynistic lyrics. Teaming up with Bennett did not make her popular in her own party. I quoted her as saying: "African American women got tired of their children calling them 'hos, bitches and sluts." Bless her memory.

So I suppose I should welcome our grand new national conversation about race, gender, shock talk and incivility. After years in which advocates of "political correctness" were criticized for allegedly promoting censorship, maybe we'll realize that public voices have a responsibility to think before they slur.

But I'm not optimistic. I can't help but see this as yet another example of how we are far more comfortable discussing what certain celebrities say than what we as a society do. We love to talk about "the culture" and what can be done about it because such talk is, quite literally, cheap.

Arguing about Imus does absolutely nothing to provide our poorest African American kids with better schools, health insurance, or a chance at college and higher incomes. We rightly heap praise on those noble Rutgers women, but we should ask ourselves whether Imus would have gotten away with comparably sleazy comments targeting less visible and less successful women, or men. I think we know the answer.

We don't want to talk about the structural problems of poverty, racism and class inequality. Words such as "class" and "structure" are so boring. It's much more fun to talk about talk.

But let's look at a few of the supposedly boring facts. According to the U.S. Census, black households in 2005 had a median income of $30,858, compared with $50,784 for non-Hispanic white households. The black poverty rate was 24.9 percent. The white poverty rate was 8.3 percent.

In 2005, according to the Justice Department, 4.7 percent of black males were in prison or jail, compared with 0.7 percent of white males. For men in their late 20s, just under 12 percent of blacks were incarcerated, compared with 1.7 percent of whites. Life expectancy for black men is more than six years shorter than for white men.

Yes, these numbers are an ongoing legacy of racism. And cultural factors, including family breakdown, are an important part of the story. But unless we spend a lot more time, energy, intellectual capital and money grappling with these facts, we can hold countless seminars on "Who Can Say What?"-- the words pasted over Imus's mouth on Time magazine's cover this week -- without doing a single serious thing to undo racism's gravest damage to our most left-out citizens.

What bothers me most is that all of us will feel so much better about ourselves after we condemn Imus -- or hip-hop or trash talk or whatever other target we pick. And when we've finished talking, how much will we have accomplished?

Subject: RE: BS: Don Imus replacment
From: Peace
Date: 16 Apr 07 - 09:58 PM

"Don Imus replacment"

I sure hope no one connects this thread title with Canada's plans for its toxic waste . . . .

Subject: RE: BS: Don Imus replacment
From: Donuel
Date: 16 Apr 07 - 04:05 PM

Where is Don Firth

was he fired too

Subject: RE: BS: Don Imus replacment
From: Riginslinger
Date: 16 Apr 07 - 04:04 PM

The real problem, I think, surfaced when Sharpton and Jackson figured out they could make themselves look good by throwing Imus to the dogs. That's when the sponsors pulled out. Apparently they wanted to look like Sharpton and Jackson, which is a little hard to figure.

Subject: RE: BS: Don Imus replacment
From: Bill Hahn//\\
Date: 16 Apr 07 - 03:30 PM

The "...liberal watch-dog group" referred to above is media matters for America. The leader of it was interviewed today on WNYC (Brian Lehrer) and states that the ultra conservites --such as Michael Savage-- call the "gay slander mongering sheet".   As the leader of the group, Paul Waldman, pointed out it is not a matter of left vs right but rather not letting the media devolve into an outlet for all the racism, sexism, and other such matters. He, further, stated that Imus has been doing this for a long time and they have called him and others on these matters. This time he, Imus, just happened to pick the wrong subject----not a politician or some powerful figure that people like to see skewered.

My own feeling---what I earlier---then the parade started and the drum majors with all the skeletons in their own closets got in front of the line.


Bill Hahn

Subject: RE: BS: Don Imus replacment
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 16 Apr 07 - 01:17 PM

Oh - it's the OTHER Ron you were talking about - well - my remark still stands; he can't be compared with MG.

Subject: RE: BS: Don Imus replacment
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 16 Apr 07 - 12:23 PM

BeardedBruce- Could I ask a favor? When there are two "Ron's" involved in the discussion, and when we both use our last name, would you mind being a bit more specific when you post a message to one of us?   Speaking for myself, I don't like having an impression that I said something that I did not.   Thanks!

Subject: RE: BS: Don Imus replacment
From: Greg B
Date: 16 Apr 07 - 12:20 PM

"Your right to say anything that crosses your mind stops where my ear
starts."

Well, then. That's probably one of the most frightening anti-freedom-of-
expression assertions I've ever heard.

"The right not to be offended" as a basic human right?

Oh, my.

Bring on the Inquisition!

Subject: RE: BS: Don Imus replacment
From: Donuel
Date: 16 Apr 07 - 11:40 AM

Exactly what part of capitalism do you find objectionable?

well I have been asnwering this one for years.

Subject: RE: BS: Don Imus replacment
From: Amos
Date: 16 Apr 07 - 11:38 AM

IMus lost his job because sponsors started pulling thier air cover. Follow the money.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Don Imus replacment
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 16 Apr 07 - 11:22 AM

"How different are YOU from Martin Gibson" ...

Now, now, BB - that's a real hit below the belt. I don't always agree with Ron, but we have yet to see him mocking the handicapped or sneering at someone who's lost a child - and I'm sure we never will. And I can't think of anything that really compares to that.

Subject: RE: BS: Don Imus replacment
From: beardedbruce
Date: 16 Apr 07 - 10:44 AM

Kendall,

Please put on your glasses.

The referent here is "BuShite" ( NOTE THE CAPITAL "S") as used by such heroic killers of strawmen as Ron Davies and others- check back and see if he EVER missed out on the capital S.

So, YES, I deo equate "DemoCraps" and "BuShites" as insulting terms, especially when used to describe anyone who disagrees with a person, regardless of the other person's reasons or validity of point of view.

Subject: RE: BS: Don Imus replacment
From: beardedbruce
Date: 16 Apr 07 - 10:36 AM

Ron,

Please show me where YOU get off saying "Exactly what part of capitalism do you find objectionable? "

"certain of his endearing habits are no longer seen here--like mocking people with handicaps."

Instead, you tell people what they never said, and mock them for YOUR words.


How different are YOU from Martin Gibson, other than what side of the issue you are pushing on the rest of us?

Subject: RE: BS: Don Imus replacment
From: M.Ted
Date: 15 Apr 07 - 11:56 PM

I've read the article, among many articles. A lot of people jumped on the bandwagon, out of the twin movitations, fear and opportunism--Sharpton is famous for joining in the front of every parade(someone said it above) and a lot of the bit players tasted blood, which had been missiing from their diet--

My point--it was stupidity, all around--and continues to be.

Subject: RE: BS: Don Imus replacment
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 15 Apr 07 - 10:44 PM

" The campaign that resulted from the "nappy-headed ho" remark started with a liberal watchdog group. "

Which I find interesting because Imus had more liberal supporters than he did conservative.   During the Clinton years, Imus was the mouthpiece for the left.

Subject: RE: BS: Don Imus replacment
From: Ron Davies
Date: 15 Apr 07 - 08:04 PM

The opposition to Imus went a lot deeper than Sharpton. The WSJ article makes that clear. The campaign that resulted from the "nappy-headed ho" remark started with a liberal watchdog group.

Subject: RE: BS: Don Imus replacment
From: Donuel
Date: 15 Apr 07 - 07:07 PM

A Bush Covert Operative Takes Over Al Sharpton's Campaign.
Is both enlightening and sad.

Subject: RE: BS: Don Imus replacment
From: M.Ted
Date: 15 Apr 07 - 07:00 PM

You are hardly ordinary, Kendall.

Perhaps you, and some of the others, would like to learn a bit more about the peculiar allegiances of Rev. Sharpton, who seems to be at the center of this media frenzy--

This piece exposes his connection to Roger Stone, the right-wing republican dirty trickster who let the group that shut down the recount in Dade County in the 2000 "election". A Bush Covert Operative Takes Over Al Sharpton's Campaign.

Subject: RE: BS: Don Imus replacment
From: kendall
Date: 15 Apr 07 - 05:22 PM

I am not a Bible thumper.Just an ordinary guy who would like to see a return to civility.

Subject: RE: BS: Don Imus replacment
From: Donuel
Date: 15 Apr 07 - 03:51 PM

Ringslinger I thought the sponsors who pulled out were more numerous than GM etc.

Don Ho mudcat scandal - perfect example of playing GOTCHA.

As for "sick bastards", I do get sick from time to time and I was a bastard in the legal sense for my first 3 years of life.

As for the Amos limmerick about the apostle Paul, perhaps MR. Ted wishes to inform the Vatican and recommend excommunication
.
There was a young man from Glenglozle
       Who found a remarkable fossil
       He deduced from the bend
       And the wart on the end
       'Twas the peter of Paul, the Apostle


Mr. Ted
Playing GOTCHA is for The Inquisition or Salem Witch trials, HUAC or suicide bombers.

_________________________________________________

The funniest thing I heard about Imus today was TIm Russert saying that a black person sent him an email about his disgust with Imus, Tim asked if there was anything he liked about the show. The emailer said he liked the character that would put a fed ex box on his head and pretend to be a Cardinal from Boston with and Irish accent who would say outragous and bawdy things...TIm wrote back "Those are MY people!"

Subject: RE: BS: Don Imus replacment
From: M.Ted
Date: 15 Apr 07 - 01:18 PM

Too late for me to grow up, PDQ;-)--Isn't embarassing when you make fun of someone, only to find out they just died? I'm sure you're not the only one that's got caught on this-- that'll teach you to go for an "easy" joke-

Subject: RE: BS: Don Imus replacment
From: Riginslinger
Date: 15 Apr 07 - 10:39 AM

In the end, the Bible thumpers Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton were the only ones who made out on the Imus thing.

         Personally, I'm not buying any products from Proctor and Gamble, General Motors, or American Express any more. If they hadn't knuckled under to the Bible thumpers, the whole thing would have blown over.

Subject: RE: BS: Don Imus replacment
From: pdq
Date: 14 Apr 07 - 11:35 PM

I guess this means I lose my radio show. Oh, the humanity!

(M.Ted:grow up)

Subject: RE: BS: Don Imus replacment
From: M.Ted
Date: 14 Apr 07 - 11:25 PM

Don Ho died today.Donuel and PDQ, you are both sick bastards.

Subject: RE: BS: Don Imus replacment
From: GUEST,mg
Date: 14 Apr 07 - 10:23 PM

Yikes..now we are being nasty about Pacific Island girls it seems. mg

Subject: RE: BS: Don Imus replacment
From: Donuel
Date: 14 Apr 07 - 09:40 PM

Don Ho? Say it ain't so.

I wanna gitchigumee all the hutchie
moony hula girls
in the world
their happy nappy snatchie
tastes like honey money goo
in their curls
yu n me an me in yu ah
an yu n me an me in yu
watcha gotcha gimme gimmie hula goo

Subject: RE: BS: Don Imus replacment
From: pdq
Date: 14 Apr 07 - 09:13 PM

God has just weighed in. Don Ho is banned from all future public performances.

Subject: RE: BS: Don Imus replacment
From: Bill D
Date: 14 Apr 07 - 07:28 PM

Hey...they look sorta alike. Do you suppose?...naawwwww...

Subject: RE: BS: Don Imus replacment
From: kendall
Date: 14 Apr 07 - 07:26 PM

As far as I'm concerned, Imus is about as funny as John Kerry.

Subject: RE: BS: Don Imus replacment
From: Bill D
Date: 14 Apr 07 - 06:50 PM

Ok, Bill...sorry I missed that

Subject: RE: BS: Don Imus replacment
From: Bill Hahn//\\
Date: 14 Apr 07 - 06:48 PM

Exactly---the producer.   I mentioned that earlier. Hopefully he was canned as well. If you read my earlier post you will see mention of him and how Imus who, for years, stayed above the fray decided, for some reason to hop into the mud that his producer writes.


Bill Hahn

Subject: RE: BS: Don Imus replacment
From: Bill D
Date: 14 Apr 07 - 06:22 PM

I,personally, have little doubt Imus WAS sorry and that his apologies were genuine....he strikes me as a guy who is not overtly racist. But he also seems to me like a guy who is likely to make a similar faux pas again. He leads with his mouth and pops off with smart-alec remarks without thinking because he is trying to affect edgy cuteness.

   I do wish his producer, who sit in the romm and who FED him the line that started this mess had been mentioned more. I guess HE lost his job, too...but he has as much blame as Imus in the whole thing.

Subject: RE: BS: Don Imus replacment
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 14 Apr 07 - 06:13 PM

The one positive aspect of this whole sorry business was the fact that the parties directly involved met and apparently talked - the meeting supposedly lasted three hours - and came to a reconciliation. To my mind, that's the only way forward - sitting down, face-to-face, listening and talking. I don't know anything about this Imus, but I really think this must have been a humbling experience, and a "learning" experience.

These kinds of problems emerge in the first place when people are able to demean others without ever having to look them in the eye ...

Subject: RE: BS: Don Imus replacment
From: Bill Hahn//\\
Date: 14 Apr 07 - 05:53 PM

Ron Davies---You make the comment about the the head of CBS' great moral lecture for the reason of firing Imus. As I said at the start of all this---well, toward the middle, if they do it--and they should it will be for the wrong reasons. I was right.

Moonves waited until the sponsors bailed out and then spouts about the great morality issue. Now---that is hypocrisy. If CBS had fired him the next day---or years ago---they would have the moral authority for their statement---not after lining their pockets by his sleaze (as others do with the likes of people like Stern and more) for years.

This brings me to Sharpton and Jackson.   I cannot say anything about the pot calling the kettle anything since that, surely, would be misconstrued. Let me just say that Sharpton and Jackson have their agendas and if they see a parade they get in front to lead ASAP. These are the leaders of such monumental morality that Jackson called NYC "Hymietown"---and of course he apologized, Sharpton ---who can count the times he has stepped over the line. Let us start with the Brawley case.   

Imus, to his own discredit, gives himself away when, in the heat of his confrontation with Sharpton, used the expression "...you people". So much for not getting to his real feelings.

Except for the basketball team, it seems that no one in this entire matter has any great morality---from CBS (NBC is sort of a gray area here--to me)Imus, and the rest of the colorful drum majors.

If all practiced the golden rule and listned to intelligent discussion on less listened to radio outlets we would all be in a better place. Of course, like TV, the "less listened to" outlets are that because they do not cater to the lowest common denominator---or as a novel about radio in the 1950s said of the audience---"...the great unwashed".

Bill Hahn

Subject: RE: BS: Don Imus replacment
From: kendall
Date: 14 Apr 07 - 04:02 PM

BB, as that old shallow, vacuous, lying two bit actor used to say, "There you go again." Are you able to think in any way except extremes? Bushite and Democrap the same thing? You are
hopeless.
Don't you think that something like, "Kerryite", or Goreite" would be a lot closer to the same as Bushite?

Subject: RE: BS: Don Imus replacment
From: Donuel
Date: 14 Apr 07 - 02:31 PM

yup

Subject: RE: BS: Don Imus replacment
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 14 Apr 07 - 12:40 PM

Donuel, there is no problem with having "green reasons". They are a business and they are beholding to their stock holders. It does make them hypocrites as they are not being honest with their reasons for firing Imus. If they had any sense of moral outrage, there would have been other actions before this.

Subject: RE: BS: Don Imus replacment
From: Ron Davies
Date: 14 Apr 07 - 12:02 PM

BB--

"his right to say something"--so Mudcat was wrong to ban "Martin"? Anybody with any powers of obsevation would note that certain of his endearing habits are no longer seen here--like mocking people with handicaps.

Sorry, the consensus is that banning Martin was a step forward. Too bad if you can't see that.


And you also need some help reading. Please point out exactly where I have called for government regulation of smarmy bums like Imus.

Subject: RE: BS: Don Imus replacment
From: Donuel
Date: 14 Apr 07 - 11:59 AM

Ron, we both realize that it was against all odds that Don was not fired by weasely executives before now. There was always a green reason not to until now.

Subject: RE: BS: Don Imus replacment
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 14 Apr 07 - 11:53 AM

I apologize for my angry response too, Jeri. My point was that "organized" boycotts can be very dangerous. The best plan of action to stop racism is to pull support, but as we saw with the blacklist - simple thoughts can be controlled. We live in a dangerous age where EVERYTHING is circumspect.    While we need to fight against racism and intolerance, the methods that we choose and how we go about doing it can impact on our freedoms.

If Don Imus worked for me, I would have fired him too. However, I would also have paid attention to what his show was about and tried to stop it before it reached this point.   For CBS and MSNBC to fire him now is hypocritical. I believe in progressive discipline and giving people a chance. What Imus said about the Rutger's team was wrong - but if he had been allowed to make previous statements of a similar nature and was rewarded for his actions (large contracts, no reprimands, etc.) then what he did was not abnormal behavior in the eyes of his employer.

Subject: RE: BS: Don Imus replacment
From: SINSULL
Date: 14 Apr 07 - 11:43 AM

Charley,
It is not because they are black or liberal but because these two men have a history of lying to suit their political needs and playing the race card for the same reason even to the point of inc iting riots.
Look into their histories and decide for yourself.
Mary

Subject: RE: BS: Don Imus replacment
From: Donuel
Date: 14 Apr 07 - 11:42 AM

Now Don Imus knows how Dan Rather feels.

Subject: RE: BS: Don Imus replacment
From: Jeri
Date: 14 Apr 07 - 11:40 AM

Ron Davies wrote, "Free speech is not in danger because a smarmy DJ was fired."

You (Ron Olesko) wrote, "Even you should be able to see where the path to "book burning" begins. Playing spin doctor won't deny it. Freedoms are not simply removed. The process begins slowly as the populace is brainwashed."

I was responding to this, because you seemed to be saying Imus shouldn't have been fired as a result of offending a lot of people, because firing him was a step on 'the path to "book burning"'.

I think it was that whole brainwashing thing I quoted that made me think you believed offending a large number of people wasn't a good enough reason to be fired. If I misunderstood, and if you were NOT saying his firing had anything - precursor or otherwise -to do with government censorship, I apologize.

Subject: RE: BS: Don Imus replacment
From: Donuel
Date: 14 Apr 07 - 11:21 AM

It wasn't hard to see from the start that DOn was going away.

When his resurrection comes there will be some interest but not nearly the kind we have seen during this feeding frenzy.

Ron,yup, a famous poitician said the fish starts to rot at the head.

Subject: RE: BS: Don Imus replacment
From: Charley Noble
Date: 14 Apr 07 - 11:18 AM

What a head-ache this thread has become!

I was pleased that the Rutgers basketball team had the grace to accept Imus's apology, while still objecting to the words he used.

It is instructive to learn from certain Mudcat posters that the motives of Mr. Sharpton and Mr. Jackson should be more closely scruntinized. Is that because they are liberal or because they are Black, or both? I suppose there may be some merit to the accusations but I do wonder about the underlying motivation. Maybe it's easier than that, just the need of a troll to get further attention.

Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Don Imus replacment
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 14 Apr 07 - 11:09 AM

Jeri - don't be ridiculous. Did I ever say that people should play these kind of songs? Did I ever say that I agree with Imus? Pay attention.

Subject: RE: BS: Don Imus replacment
From: Jeri
Date: 14 Apr 07 - 10:44 AM

Ron, do you still have a radio show?

Play some songs commonly referred to as 'coon' songs, and call them that on the air. Play the tune called 'Nigger in the Woodpile' and name it. Don't give any disclaimer whatsoever about the use of the words.

See how long YOUR job lasts. Let us know when you plan to do this, because I want to hear it.

Subject: RE: BS: Don Imus replacment
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 14 Apr 07 - 10:27 AM

Ron Davies - you are naive. Even you should be able to see where the path to "book burning" begins. Playing spin doctor won't deny it. Freedoms are not simply removed. The process begins slowly as the populace is brainwashed. Already signs are evident, such as the FCC's heavy-handed dealing with "obscenity". It is very true that the FCC had nothing to do with it, but there were calls for the FCC to do something - notably from Al Sharpton who helped galvanize this witch hunt.

You are also naive when you say that boycotting from advertisers is the best plan of action. While it is true in theory, and I do support boycotts, you fail to acknowledge that these boycotts can also be orchestrated. The blacklist of the 1950's was such a case. The American Legion played a big role in having many people blacklisted, including the Weavers. Naturally not all members felt that way, but having an organization's name behind a boycott allows greater impact. The fact that Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson were behind this movement against Don Imus shows the power of organizations.   

Control the media and you can control the way people think. The deregulation by the FCC that begain in the 1980's backfired against liberal causes. Instead of allowing for greater diversity and sharing of ideas, it led to corporate ownership of the media.

Subject: RE: BS: Don Imus replacment
From: beardedbruce
Date: 14 Apr 07 - 09:17 AM

Washington Post:

Just the Beginning
Firing Don Imus should be the start, not the end, of the dialogue.
Saturday, April 14, 2007; Page A18


WHAT A NERVE radio shock jock Don Imus struck. His denigration last week of the Rutgers women's basketball team as "nappy-headed hos" sparked protests that first cost him his deal with MSNBC and ultimately his perch at CBS Radio. But what Mr. Imus did is a symptom of a larger problem. And it didn't take long for the debate to move from his racist and misogynistic musings to gangsta rap, its artists and the record companies that have helped move hateful words and negative images of women and African Americans into the mainstream. Maybe now those who have been battling this for years will finally be heard.

The right to freely express one's views through art, music, writing and the spoken word is a jewel of American democracy. It is a right we cherish and will defend. But the right to express doesn't mean there is an obligation to consume. Degrading racist and sexist lyrics and images don't have to be celebrated and consumed. That's what led Tipper Gore more than 20 years ago to push for content-warning labels on record albums marketed to children.

When Mrs. Gore led that movement in 1985, it was in reaction to "Purple Rain" by Prince. Today, the lyrics of the songs on that album would seem quaint compared with the raunchy rhymes of rappers like 50 Cent ("P.I.M.P."), DMX ("My Niggas") Lil' Kim ("Shut Up Bitch") and Ludacris ("Ho").

In an appearance on MSNBC this week, Bob Johnson, the founder of Black Entertainment Television, which has been criticized for airing coarse music videos, said, "I told the record industry, look, guys, if you guys want to stop making these kinds of video, believe me, I have no problems in not showing them." But more active leadership to try to get the industry to change was needed back when Mr. Johnson was speaking up. It is still needed now.

The common use of racist language and negative images of women, African American women in particular, won't end if those with the power to effect change sit on the sidelines. The late C. Delores Tucker railed against rap's misogyny. The Rev. Calvin Butts of New York used to bulldoze rap CDs on a Harlem street to protest their lyrics and lurid images of black life. And the Rev. Al Sharpton, who led the campaign to fire Mr. Imus, has spoken out repeatedly about this. If anything positive is to come from ending Mr. Imus's 30-plus-year-radio career, the revulsion at his comment will extend to the gangsta-rap artists and their record companies.

Subject: RE: BS: Don Imus replacment
From: beardedbruce
Date: 14 Apr 07 - 08:53 AM

kendall,

"I find it hard to believe that anyone with more than a teaspoon full of brains is unable to decide what will offend and what won't. Remember the "Golden Rule"?"

"As far as I know, "Bushite" is a kickname for anyone who believes in GW Bush.No more, no less."


And n-----r was just a word to describ blacks back before the Civil War.

The use of "BuShite" has been as a derogatory name for anyone that does not toe the Liberal Party line, especially here.

So, If I call you, repeatedly a "DemoCrap" whenever you make any comment I do not like, even after you had asked me to stop, you would not consider that I was trying to be insulting?