Tired of hate radio - or not so much ??

[sandnsea]

If any one of us had called a customer or client a "nappy headed ho", we'd have been fired. Same for Don Imus. If we'd start defending that action, maybe we could put a little fear in the rest of these hate-radio idiots and force them to tone it down. But nooooo, we totally let them frame the entire debate, AGAIN, and lose another battle to restore sanity and informed democracy. Having listened to DUers' outrage over these idiots on an almost daily basis - how can any of you not realize that THIS is the moment we've been waiting for??

But noooo, we let the right frame this even though they're only protecting THEIR hate radio idiots AND their media empires.

They are attempting to shift the focus to the victim, just like they always do. This is about racist and hateful speech. It's not about someone rapping about what goes on in their 'hood. It's not about supporting someone you think has been victimized. It's certainly not about anything that happened 20 years ago. Put Don Imus' 30 year history against Al Sharpton's - and Don Imus loses BIG. If Anne Coulter wasn't funny when she used "faggot" towards Edwards, and deserved to be fired - then so does Don Imus.

I do not understand what I've seen transpire at DU these last few days. It's been sad and disheartening.

[AX10]

1. The less Imus the better. And you know what would even be better?

No more Hannity, Rush, Savage, Coulter, etc.....

[sandnsea]

2. Clear Channel??

Do you suppose they're involved in creating the spin to take the focus off hate radio and put it on the victims?? Is this the first time race has been used to divide and conquer?

[MrModerate]

3. But the Imus defense is that . . .

This is his stock in trade -- and no one seriously complained before, when he made statements (nearly) as outrageous. He's a "shock jock," and by definition crude, lewd, offensive, and mean-spirited.

I can't stand to watch/listen to Imus' shit (but I can't tolerate Hannity, Limbaugh, Savage, Coulter, O'Reilly -- the whole pack of 'em), but I wonder in what way were Imus' vile spews the other day any worse than his regular output? I.e., where do we get off being outraged *now*?

[sandnsea]

4. bullshit

I just heard that crap on MSNBC too. Get your own thought or don't talk to me. That's rude, but not racist or sexist. Duh.

[MrModerate]

5. Well, you've certainly baffled me . . .

I don't have access to MSNBC during the day, so if they just asked the same question I did, that's synchronicity at work.

[sandnsea]

6. Is it on hate radio too?

Someone else used the same excuse in another thread. Is that today's talking point??

The KKK always burns crosses, so why should we get all upset about it today. :sarcasm:

Again, this country sucks ass. Left, right and middle.

[MrModerate]

7. Actually, I think people still get very excited whenever someone . . .

Burns a cross. As well they should.

Which is my point. Imus is a foul-mouthed asshole every time he appears on the air. People are just noticing now? Or is this a Terry-Schaivo-Natalie Holloway-Anna Nicole Smith moment where the press and the activist communities left and right have gotten huge bees up their respective butts?

[sandnsea]

8. Actually they haven't

Cross burning was perfectly acceptable for decades. Even when many folks thought they didn't happen any more, they moved to the south and were shocked to discover they did - and didn't get any media attention. They still happen occasionally, and rarely make national news. If one SHOULD make national news - should we respond with "people are just noticing now"? And wonder whether the "activist communities" have gotten "huge bees up their respective butts"?

Putrid response, really putrid.

I guess hate radio is a-ok with you, is that it?

[MrModerate]

9. I'm a long time donor to the Southern Poverty Law Center . . .

And in their materials, they provide regular stats on cross burnings and the like (admittedly, they've been focusing on skinhead groups over the last few years, but they do observe other hateful acts).

Many if not most of the cross-burnings and similar acts they report *do* get national play, and all are roundly condemned by the national reporter and the local news outlet. They "rarely" make the national news because they're thankfully rare. While cross-burnings were definitely underreported during the period when Nathan Bedford Forrest was still alive, it is a different world now.

Imus is a different case. He's a professional vulgarian, much like Howard Stern. He's a showman of four-letter words like a lot of stand-up comics, just like Sean Hannity is a showman of wingnut rectitude and Anne Coulter is a show(man) of misanthropic bile. None of this is a-ok with me and my response is to not watch or listen to such "entertainment."

But as bad as these freaks are, they're not "hate radio." Michael Savage is hate radio. Survivalists hiding out in Idaho and exhorting their followers to blow up federal buildings, that's hate radio. Other people (who I don't listen to) are hate radio.

My point is, it's a bit disingenuous to get in a lather about an offensive remark from a radio personality who makes his living making offensive remarks. Did this one go over the line? Maybe so, given the public reaction. I just think this guy has lived his professional career over the line and the current brouhaha says more about media feeding frenzies than it does about hate speech.

[sandnsea]

10. this country sucks ass

:puke:

really. we're lost.

I give up.