AOL sports Whitlock commentary

[BAMMERPERRY 0]

http://sports.aol.com/whitlock/_a/time-for...411111509990001

[saniflush 0]

Interesting. I would say that this writer will be ostracized from the black community.

On a side note when was the last time that white people were the only ones who had a vote to cast for the Presidential election? Or is there some white leadership organization in the United States that I was not made aware of so I could cast my vote?

[jw 4 au 526]

Geeze, if that is not telling it like it is, i don't know what is then. I never really thought about it that way, but I guess it is true. What have Jesse and Al accomplished over the past 25 years in comparison to MLK? Not much but pad thier bank accounts. They sure don't believe in "living by example". Jason Whitlock has always had these point of views, and probably has been shunned by the black community some. I have even seen him and John Saunders get into it some on The Sports Reporters on similar issues he discusses in the article. Remember Saunders, he had to publically appologize to Auburn University for accusing the BOT of "mob-like" behavior in burning down a Tuskeegee newspaper office.

[otterinbham 0]

Yes, but....

I get really tired of the "The other side does it, too" mentality.

Look. The guy called a women's college basketball team "nappy-headed hos." Period. It's racist, it's sexist, and calls the girls' collective morality into question. This isn't something that you'd say in polite society. It's something you generally wouldn't say in impolite society, either--unless you were just asking for a pool cue across the chops. Personally, if it were my radio station, I wouldn't have waited several days to fire the SOB. I would have walked into the studio and jerked the microphone out of his hands.

If you really stand for civility and mutual respect, then you cannot defend Imus' statements. You can't simply defend somebody just because they're on your side of the aisle, whether it's Imus, Coulter, Howard Stern or Rosie O'Donnell.

[JohnDeere 0]

Yes, but....

I get really tired of the "The other side does it, too" mentality.

Look. The guy called a women's college basketball team "nappy-headed hos." Period. It's racist, it's sexist, and calls the girls' collective morality into question. This isn't something that you'd say in polite society. It's something you generally wouldn't say in impolite society, either--unless you were just asking for a pool cue across the chops. Personally, if it were my radio station, I wouldn't have waited several days to fire the SOB. I would have walked into the studio and jerked the microphone out of his hands.

If you really stand for civility and mutual respect, then you cannot defend Imus' statements. You can't simply defend somebody just because they're on your side of the aisle, whether it's Imus, Coulter, Howard Stern or Rosie O'Donnell.

The other side? its called "freedom of speech", has something to do with the constitution I think.

[otterinbham 0]

Yes, but....

I get really tired of the "The other side does it, too" mentality.

Look. The guy called a women's college basketball team "nappy-headed hos." Period. It's racist, it's sexist, and calls the girls' collective morality into question. This isn't something that you'd say in polite society. It's something you generally wouldn't say in impolite society, either--unless you were just asking for a pool cue across the chops. Personally, if it were my radio station, I wouldn't have waited several days to fire the SOB. I would have walked into the studio and jerked the microphone out of his hands.

If you really stand for civility and mutual respect, then you cannot defend Imus' statements. You can't simply defend somebody just because they're on your side of the aisle, whether it's Imus, Coulter, Howard Stern or Rosie O'Donnell.

The other side? its called "freedom of speech", has something to do with the constitution I think.

Ah. The tired "Freedom of Speech" argument.

I'm probably a bigger Freedom of Speech advocate than you are. But there's a profound difference between stating an unpopular political belief and just hurling racial epithets over the airwaves to get a cheap laugh.

I don't think the FCC kicked in the door and arrested Imus, did they? Has the state of New York issued a warrant for the guy?

What happened was that commercial sponsors and the station owners were reacting to popular outrage. And well they should. Hey, I've listened to Imus before. Sometimes I thought he made some good points as a professional skeptic. But this was over the top and inexcusable.

Tell you what. Let's have a little exercise. Why don't you, in your next client meeting, refer to the cleaning lady as a "Nappy Headed Ho"? Or the guy in the next department as "a greasy beaner." Or maybe type out an e-mail referring to a coworker as a "slut" or a "effete bastard." Go ahead and do that, and see how long you last at your job.

And when you are shown the door, we'll see how well that "Freedom of Speech" argument holds up in your defense. Or toss out "nappy headed ho" at your next Bible study or dinner party. Let's see how you're regarded by your peers.

My argument is simple. The man did not adhere to the basic standards of civility that we expect in society, and was punished for it by his employer. The First Amendment has absolutely nothing to do with it.

As Oliver Wendell Holmes stated, freedom of speech doesn't give you the right to shout "fire" in a crowded theater. Nor does it protect you from the consequences of saying something distasteful. All it does is shield you from prosecution.

[CCTAU 3,351]

He was punished because he was white saying something negative against blacks. Black DJs do it all the time. RIGHT OR WRONG. But the only one's who pay for it are the whites. Your argument works for a perfect world, but to ignore that it happens on both sides is creating a society where even if racism is not rampant, it will grow due to the inequality of the justice that is being handed out.

[JohnDeere 0]

My argument is simple. The man did not adhere to the basic standards of civility that we expect in society, and was punished for it by his employer. The First Amendment has absolutely nothing to do with it.

So, in another case the employer being a major record label that employees black artists who frequently use vulagrity and glamorization as violence in song lyrics..................

Can you imagine Snoop Dogg being fired, just because he is tooooo sexist or uses other racists terms in his music?

Imus did make a racist, sexist comment. Do those comments make Imus racist?

[otterinbham 0]

My argument is simple. The man did not adhere to the basic standards of civility that we expect in society, and was punished for it by his employer. The First Amendment has absolutely nothing to do with it.

So, in another case the employer being a major record label that employees black artists who frequently use vulagrity and glamorization as violence in song lyrics..................

Can you imagine Snoop Dogg being fired, just because he is tooooo sexist or uses other racists terms in his music?

Did I say it was right? I think he's equally repulsive. But, if you go back to my original post, "The Other Side Does It, Too" argument just doesn't cut it with me. It means you value political expediency and partisanship over what is right. And that's a big problem in our society today.

[jw 4 au 526]

Yes, but....

I get really tired of the "The other side does it, too" mentality.

Look. The guy called a women's college basketball team "nappy-headed hos." Period. It's racist, it's sexist, and calls the girls' collective morality into question. This isn't something that you'd say in polite society. It's something you generally wouldn't say in impolite society, either--unless you were just asking for a pool cue across the chops. Personally, if it were my radio station, I wouldn't have waited several days to fire the SOB. I would have walked into the studio and jerked the microphone out of his hands.

If you really stand for civility and mutual respect, then you cannot defend Imus' statements. You can't simply defend somebody just because they're on your side of the aisle, whether it's Imus, Coulter, Howard Stern or Rosie O'Donnell.

The other side? its called "freedom of speech", has something to do with the constitution I think.

Ah. The tired "Freedom of Speech" argument.

I'm probably a bigger Freedom of Speech advocate than you are. But there's a profound difference between stating an unpopular political belief and just hurling racial epithets over the airwaves to get a cheap laugh.

I don't think the FCC kicked in the door and arrested Imus, did they? Has the state of New York issued a warrant for the guy?

What happened was that commercial sponsors and the station owners were reacting to popular outrage. And well they should. Hey, I've listened to Imus before. Sometimes I thought he made some good points as a professional skeptic. But this was over the top and inexcusable.

Tell you what. Let's have a little exercise. Why don't you, in your next client meeting, refer to the cleaning lady as a "Nappy Headed Ho"? Or the guy in the next department as "a greasy beaner." Or maybe type out an e-mail referring to a coworker as a "slut" or a "effete bastard." Go ahead and do that, and see how long you last at your job.

And when you are shown the door, we'll see how well that "Freedom of Speech" argument holds up in your defense. Or toss out "nappy headed ho" at your next Bible study or dinner party. Let's see how you're regarded by your peers.

My argument is simple. The man did not adhere to the basic standards of civility that we expect in society, and was punished for it by his employer. The First Amendment has absolutely nothing to do with it.

As Oliver Wendell Holmes stated, freedom of speech doesn't give you the right to shout "fire" in a crowded theater. Nor does it protect you from the consequences of saying something distasteful. All it does is shield you from prosecution.

Ah geeze, the "I get tired of the <INSERT POINT HERE> argument" argument. You are acting rediculous. Try getting your head out of the sand and actually look around for once. And why don't you preach down to me a little bit more, as if your experiences and view points trump all others because you actually know what is right for everyone else who must not be as smart as you. Reread my original post Einstein, it never once mentioned anything about Imus. It was specifically about Jason Whitlock (the subject of this thread) and Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton.

From your post I am not sure if you actually even know who Jason Whitlock is. He is an african-american (or "the other side" as you would call it) journalist and former sit in on The Sports Reporters with some interesting points of view. I was simply trying to steer the conversation to the other interesting points of the Imus debates, specifically the validity of Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton today to the black community. They can run down to Duke and crucify three college kids for "gang-raping" and crack head stripper, who as it turns out, was drunk off her can, changed her story more than a few times, it wasn't the first time she falsely made similar claims, offer her a full scolarship (of which she has not called them back on because she is too busy stripping), etc., etc., etc. with no responsibility at all. I think those three boys lives were affected more then the entire Rutgers girls backetball team together. No doubt about it. My post had nothing to do with "the other side does it too" mentally. It was a comment on Jason Whitlocks stated opinion, of which I strongly agree, that Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton do not represent the entire eblack commumity and actually are doing worse for the race relations than Don Imus' comments. Whitlock's comments remind me of Bill Cosby's recent comments and speaking engagements of similar points. All of this, I find very interesting to where I want to learn more about these viewpoints, whether from my friends here at work, at home, or here on this board. Otter, you are really being over-sensitive on an issue that is bigger than one person. That's the point.

For the record, I could care less what happened to Imus as a result of his comments. No one can argue that they weren't incensitive or degrading. He lives and learns like the rest of us. He makes enough money to retire comfortably, but will probably be on the radio again in a year or two. I don't listen to him, but I do remember the day (early and mid '80's) of him being in direct competition with Howard Stern, nothing more than a true "shock jock". They and others like them (remember the Grease Man) have been offendng all sorts of people for many, many years. Stern is still doing it. One day it is funny, the next it is a crisis.

[otterinbham 0]

"Ah geeze, the "I get tired of the <INSERT POINT HERE> argument" argument. You are acting rediculous. Try getting your head out of the sand and actually look around for once. And why don't you preach down to me a little bit more, as if your experiences and view points trump all others because you actually know what is right for everyone else who must not be as smart as you. Reread my original post Einstein, it never once mentioned anything about Imus. It was specifically about Jason Whitlock (the subject of this thread) and Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton.

From your post I am not sure if you actually even know who Jason Whitlock is. He is an african-american (or "the other side" as you would call it) journalist and former sit in on The Sports Reporters with some interesting points of view. I was simply trying to steer the conversation to the other interesting points of the Imus debates, specifically the validity of Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton today to the black community. They can run down to Duke and crucify three college kids for "gang-raping" and crack head stripper, who as it turns out, was drunk off her can, changed her story more than a few times, it wasn't the first time she falsely made similar claims, offer her a full scolarship (of which she has not called them back on because she is too busy stripping), etc., etc., etc. with no responsibility at all. I think those three boys lives were affected more then the entire Rutgers girls backetball team together. No doubt about it. My post had nothing to do with "the other side does it too" mentally. It was a comment on Jason Whitlocks stated opinion, of which I strongly agree, that Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton do not represent the entire eblack commumity and actually are doing worse for the race relations than Don Imus' comments. Whitlock's comments remind me of Bill Cosby's recent comments and speaking engagements of similar points. All of this, I find very interesting to where I want to learn more about these viewpoints, whether from my friends here at work, at home, or here on this board. Otter, you are really being over-sensitive on an issue that is bigger than one person. That's the point."

Actually, I wasn't referring to Whitlock, whose column I read a lot and admire, thanks. I'm referring to the respondents to the post who complain when somebody of their ideological stripe gets pilloried, but are first to line up for a lynching for somebody on the other side of the aisle.

[jw 4 au 526]

Actually, I wasn't referring to Whitlock, whose column I read a lot and admire, thanks. I'm referring to the respondents to the post who complain when somebody of their ideological stripe gets pilloried, but are first to line up for a lynching for somebody on the other side of the aisle.

Uhhh, that is no where to be found in this thread. Two comment above yours, mine and Saniflush's (excluding BP's of course), neither close to your accusations. Apparently you just like to "bitch" about anything not meeting your high standards of liberalism in this forum. And you must have a reading comprehension problem because based upon your last post, you still haven't grasped the intent of this thread or Jason Whitlock's article (whom you hold in such a high regard). No offense, I am just interested in what others think of JJ and AS, simple as that. I find it interesting that the likes of Whitlock and Cosby, as well as some collegues here at work, think they do more harm than good. We all know they are selfish.

Now let's see another line from the Washington Post or LA Times. So far we have "political expediency and partisanship" and "ideological stripe gets pilloried".

[BAMMERPERRY 0]

http://www.newsday.com/sports/columnists/n...olumn?track=rss

Sports Columnists Email this story

SPORTS COLUMNIST

It's more than just Imus

April 12, 2007

In retrospect, outraged people shouldn't have united and screamed "blank you" to Don Imus the last few days. No, instead, we should've stuck out our hand and said, "Thank you."

We should feel indebted to a shriveled, unfunny, insensitive frog for being so ignorant that he actually did us all a favor. He woke society the hell up. He grabbed it by the throat, shook hard and ordered us to take a long, critical look at ourselves and the mess we've made and ignored for much too long. He made us examine the culture and the characters we've created for ourselves, our impressionable young people and our future.

Had Imus not called a bunch of proud and innocent young women "nappy-headed hos," would we be as ashamed of what we see as we are today?

Or, to quote Rutgers coach C. Vivian Stringer: "Have we really lost our moral fiber?"

And our minds as well?

I'm not sure if the last few days will serve as a watershed moment for this MTV, middle-finger, screw-you generation. Probably not, according to my hunch. A short time from now, the hysteria will turn to vapor, folks will settle back into their routines, somebody will pump up the volume on the latest poison produced by hip-hop while Al Sharpton and the other racial ambulance chasers will find other guilt-ridden white folks to shake for fame and cash. In five minutes, the entire episode of Imus and his strange idea of humor will be older than his hairstyle. Lessons learned will be lessons forgotten.

I wish I were wrong about that last part. But I doubt it, because any minute now, black people will resume calling themselves bitches and hos and the N-word and in the ultimate sign of hypocrisy, neither Rutgers nor anyone else will call a news conference about that.

Because when we really get to the root of the problem, this isn't about Imus. This is about a culture we -- meaning black folks -- created and condoned and packaged for white power brokers to sell and shock jocks like Imus to exploit. Can we talk?

Tell me: Where did an old white guy like Imus learn the word "ho"?

Was that always part of his vocabulary? Or did he borrow it from Jay-Z and Dave Chappelle and Snoop Dogg?

What really disappointed me about that exhausting Rutgers news conference, which was slyly used as a recruiting pitch by Stringer, was the absence of the truth and the lack of backbone and courage. Black women had the perfect opportunity to lash out at their most dangerous oppressors -- black men -- and yet they kept the focus on a white guy.

It was a tremendous letdown for me, personally and professionally. I wanted Stringer, and especially her players, many of whom listen to rap and hip-hop, to take Nelly to task. Or BET. Or MTV. Or the gangsta culture that is suffocating our kids. They had the ear and eye of the nation trained upon them, and yet these women didn't get to the point and the root of the matter. They danced around it, and I guess I should've known better, because black people still refuse to lash out against those black people who are doing harm to us all.

Honestly, I wasn't holding my breath for Sharpton or Jesse Jackson, a pair of phony and self-appointed leaders, because they have their agendas and financial stakes. I was hoping 10 young women, who have nothing on the line, who are members of a young culture, would train their attention to within the race, name names and say enough is enough. But they didn't, and I was crushed.

You should walk around the playground and the elementary and high schools today and listen to how young black people speak to each other, treat each other and tease each other. You'd be ashamed. Next, sample some of their CDs and look at the video games they're playing. And while you're at it, blame yourself for funding this garbage, for allowing your kids to support these companies and for not taking a stand against it or the so-called artists making it happen.

Black folks, for whatever reason, can be their own worst enemy. The last several days, the media had us believe it was Don Imus. But deep down, we know better.