Editore"s Note
Tilting at Windmills

Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

April 16, 2007
By: Kevin Drum

NO, NOT A GOOD PERSON....Via Scott McLemee, Phil Nugent delivers the first Don Imus rant that actually kept me semi-riveted all the way to the end. Here's a key bit:

The talk radio world, one that Imus worked hard to shape, is one where overpaid white guys who did well in the voting for the title of "Class Clown" at their respective high schools sneer at blacks, women, gays, what have you, in a dismayingly self-congratulatory tone.

....I remember that when Howard Stern began a short-lived tenure of having his show broadcast in New Orleans, he held a press conderence, and one of the local reporters asked him how he would compete with the hilarious, daring wild man talk guy who was already doing a New Orleans morning show, and whose name escapes me. Stern, who'd clearly never heard the local guy's name, said something like, what's he do, like a Southern guy and a black guy and a gay guy, all the while doing high-school level impersonations of a drawling hick, a Stepin Fetchit type, and a nelly dude, which did indeed sound exactly like the local guy's repertoire of funny voices. I remember that the New Orleans reporter was stunned by this, and seemed genuinely unaware that there was some yokel doing the same basic act at some radio station in every city in America.

The whole thing is well worth reading, and deserves a spot in the New York Times, not an obscure blog. I may be almost as tired of the sanctimony of the anti-Imus forces as I am of the revolting phenomenon of Don Imus himself, but Nugent captures that revolting phenomenon, and the wider cesspool it comes from, better than anyone else I've read.

Kevin Drum 1:54 PM Permalink | Trackbacks | Comments (172)

Bookmark and Share
 
Comments

Very importantly, the most obnoxious ranters/offenders types are typically "conservatives" or pseudo-libertarains, not liberals/progressives.
What does that tell us?

Posted by: Neil B. on April 16, 2007 at 2:10 PM | PERMALINK

The talk radio world, one that Imus worked hard to shape, is one where overpaid white guys who did well in the voting for the title of "Class Clown" at their respective high schools sneer at blacks, women, gays, what have you, in a dismayingly self-congratulatory tone.

Yes, I can see how that paragraph would keep Kevin and the loony left "semi-riveted".

It has all the ingredients for a great weenie liberal read. Demonization of whites, a healthy dose of self-loathing opportunity. Heaps of race allegations, and on and on...

If the blogger could've somehow worked in a critical tie-in to President Bush, Kevin would have achieved total nirvana.

Posted by: sportsfan79 on April 16, 2007 at 2:12 PM | PERMALINK

Keep Howard Stern out of this. He's the a genuine satirist and he's needed.

Posted by: Vividu on April 16, 2007 at 2:18 PM | PERMALINK

Phil Nugent delivers the first Don Imus rant that actually kept me semi-riveted all the way to the end.

Kevin, I think I've counted 3 or 4 posts attacking Imus on this blog, but none about the railroading of the Duke Lacrosse team. How come? I think it's more than a tad hypocritical for you to attack Imus for being a racist and sexist without defending the Duke Lacrosse team from the racism and sexism they were the victim of.
As for Imus, I saw Carville and Begala defending him this morning on CNN which means he can hardly compared with right leaning talk show hosts like Rush Limbaugh. I think it's unfair for you to pick Imus as an example of conservative talk radio when he isn't even a conservative. Otherwise, Carville and Begala wouldn't defend him.
But I think if Imus is to be fired, Rosie O'Donnell should also be fired for her racism against Chinese people on the View. How come that didn't happen?

Posted by: Al on April 16, 2007 at 2:21 PM | PERMALINK

In the late Eighties a popular 'classic rock' radio station in Phoenix had a local cowboy writer who made all kinds of jokes about and spoofs of African-Americans. I thought it was insulting and stopped listening. That writer now has a prominent spot in the Sunday local monopoly opinion newspaper's Sunday editorial section.

Posted by: Brojo on April 16, 2007 at 2:21 PM | PERMALINK

'Yes, I can see how that paragraph would keep Kevin and the loony left "semi-riveted".

It has all the ingredients for a great weenie liberal read. Demonization of whites, a healthy dose of self-loathing opportunity. Heaps of race allegations, and on and on...

If the blogger could've somehow worked in a critical tie-in to President Bush, Kevin would have achieved total nirvana.

'

His rush to judgement is matched by your rush to dismissal.

Posted by: jg on April 16, 2007 at 2:23 PM | PERMALINK

Why do lefty-moderates get "sick of" the Don Imus affair two minutes into it, and start saying "so what? they do it worse in rap songs?"

If I were the father of one of those girls on that basketball team, and I was in a dark alley with Don Imus, I'd make sure that when he walked out of that alley he could rightfully be called a "toothless cracker."

NOTHING excuses the crap that came out of Don Imus' mouth. And if he got fired, he got what was coming to him. End of story.

NOW let's talk about those other things.

Posted by: bob on April 16, 2007 at 2:24 PM | PERMALINK

"loony left"
"weenie liberal"
"Demonization of whites"

You pretty much prove Kevin's point: "sneer[ing] at blacks, women, gays, what have you [that is 'weenie liberals']" is what your talk radio heroes have taught you, sportsfan79. And you have the gall to say that it's "whites" who are being "demonized." Right after you've finished demonizing liberals for three paragraphs yourself, for no apparent reason.

Look in the mirror, if you want to see a "demonizer."

Posted by: David in NY on April 16, 2007 at 2:24 PM | PERMALINK

Al doesn't read the comments.

Stupid, there were 5000 comments attacking Nancy Grace, etc. for railroading the Duke lacrosse team.

Posted by: absent observer on April 16, 2007 at 2:25 PM | PERMALINK

Could someone please tell me what thin veneer of rationality the wingnuts are using to label Imus a "liberal"?

Honestly there's absolutely no difference between his opinions and Rush Limbaugh.

Unless the nutties are going to argue Rush is a liberal too I'd have to say Imus is as conservative as they come.

Posted by: Dr. Morpheus on April 16, 2007 at 2:29 PM | PERMALINK

Kung Fu Monkey also does a great job of explaining why Imus's comments were not about being funny, but about demeaning young women. He was nothing more than a BIGOT, good riddance!

http://kfmonkey.blogspot.com/

And as Neil B. says above, KFM and his commenters also take to task the pseudo-libertarians (John, Cole, etc.) and conservatives who can't or won't understand that its not about free speech but about racism and bigotry.

Posted by: F on April 16, 2007 at 2:31 PM | PERMALINK

Let's pretend for a second that Imus WAS a liberal commentator....


uhh... so what? Now everybody hates him, because he showed himself to be an ass. I fail to see how this discredits anybody, let along their political platform.

This whole business where we try to discredit policy options by pointing out that a messenger of those options is "bad" is juvenile, pathetic, and myopic.

Posted by: Duncan on April 16, 2007 at 2:33 PM | PERMALINK

mhr,

Yeah, and you were at the fore front of attacking Imus for his pit bull tactics against the Clintons.

Russert, a liberal????? - Check out his guest list sometimes - Mostly Repugs and he only attacks the Democratic guests. He is a "liberal" in the same vein as Chris Matthews, two tony island swells who play to the power of the Shrubs.

Posted by: thethirdPaul on April 16, 2007 at 2:37 PM | PERMALINK

A lot of what you need to know about Imus and his fans can be learned from the fact that the Rutgers Women's Basketball Team is now getting hate mail.

One hates to generalize, but I doubt if any of it came from Liberals. Are there no liberal bigots in the world? Of course there are. But few, if any, of them get the 50,000 WATT FLAMETHROWER OF TRUTH (I'm not making that phrase up!) radio megaphones.

Posted by: thersites on April 16, 2007 at 2:38 PM | PERMALINK

Oh, good grief. The Duke boys weren't victims of racism and sexism, they were victims of a mentally disturbed woman and an incompetent overaggressive prosecutor in a tight election race. What happened to them was terrible, but it was notable because wealthy white boys rarely get railroaded like this, and they can usually afford the legal firepower to get justice eventually. This kind of thing happens multiple times every day to black men and women.

As for Rosie O'Donnell, she's treading on very thin ice right now, but a couple of unpleasant cracks aren't even close to being in the same league as Imus's decades of routine daily racist/sexist/homophobic ugliness.

Posted by: gyrfalcon on April 16, 2007 at 2:41 PM | PERMALINK

"What hypocrites liberals are!"

*Damn* those liberals, for agreeing with one thing Don Imus said and disagreeing with another thing he said!

Posted by: Dix Hill on April 16, 2007 at 2:42 PM | PERMALINK

Imus is the new OJ.

Spare your fellow man and toss him in the memory hole.

Meanwhile in Iraq ...

Posted by: alex on April 16, 2007 at 2:49 PM | PERMALINK

Kevin, the Imus affair is not about his choice of words or the existence of shock radio generally. No one expected more of Imus and comparisons to rap music and Howard Stern are somewhat superficial. Imus got in trouble and was properly criticized not due to some sudden outpouring of concern over the state of discourse in the US. Imus lost his show and a storm of controversy arose because he insulted, in a very demeaning manner, a group of high achieving students who did not invite the slur and should never have been insulted.

This media attention is not about what was said so much as it is about the fact that he picked on and insulted a group of innocent students that didn't ask for it and deserved our admiration and accolades.

Posted by: BobPM on April 16, 2007 at 2:52 PM | PERMALINK

I think we've missed the larger point of Affair D'Imus. Imus was (is) what he was (is): a provocateur at heart. He found his voice, however, when he discovered that there was a great mass of white male bitterness and resentment that he could tap into. A sneering sort of worldview that said do-gooders were insincere and that reverence for the Good Old Days was the one true calling.

The casual bogotry, misogyny, homophobia, etc., were all just a part of it. Imus loved nothing more than pointing out that someone who was revered was in fact less than perfect. And oddly, some truly idious people were able to be celebrated because they had one small corner of their souls that were in fact non-odious (Rick Santorum, John McCain, etc.)

The victory here is not the removal of Don Imus, because he won't be gone for long. The victory here will come if we are a bit more steeled to confront the empty-headed white bitterness that insists, above all, on thinking that whites and blacks are similarly situated when it comes to race relations.

Posted by: Jim Pharo on April 16, 2007 at 3:03 PM | PERMALINK
...Demonization of whites... sportsfan79 at 2:12 PM

All fantasy claims of white victimhood.

Now that Imus has been outed as a liberal bigot,... mh rat 2:24 PM

The attack of the straw man!
There was nothing liberal about Imus. He is a McCain supporter. He is a racist. Those are not 'liberal' values. Nor are those you mention, Rich, Russet, Fineman, Thomas or Mattews, are part of any 'liberal' Parthenon. It would have been strange for Blankley to attack Imus since Blankley has made his own racist statements, or for Cliff to defend his sexist remarks. Here is a list of all guests in '07, not specially selected for party affiliation.
Frankly, Imus is just the tip of the racist hate speakers on American talk radio. I would be happy to see CNN remove Glen Beck as the next example of what should not be tolerated on the air.

Posted by: Mike on April 16, 2007 at 3:04 PM | PERMALINK

Who knew Ted Nugent could write so well?

Posted by: Kenji on April 16, 2007 at 3:05 PM | PERMALINK

Who knew Ted Nugent could write so well?
Posted by: Kenji

*snort*

Posted by: MsNThrope on April 16, 2007 at 3:25 PM | PERMALINK

are there any conservatives out there capable of arguing intelligently on this blog, or are mhr, sportsfan, al, et al, the best that they have? seems like their bench is pretty darn thin. below the mendoza line thin.

Posted by: mudwall jackson on April 16, 2007 at 3:37 PM | PERMALINK

a local cowboy writer who made all kinds of jokes about and spoofs of African-Americans.

Bob Boze Bell

Posted by: Brojo on April 16, 2007 at 3:37 PM | PERMALINK

Do people forget that Rush Limbaugh got fired from ESPN for racial statements about a football player.

I guess the moral of the story is DON'T put these guys on TV. At first Imus was only getting suspended for two weeks but then advertisers started canceling their commercials – that’s when Imus got fired and I’m sure ESPN saw the threat of lost profits too.

Posted by: Cheryl on April 16, 2007 at 3:38 PM | PERMALINK

"I may be almost as tired of the sanctimony of the anti-Imus forces as I am of the revolting phenomenon of Don Imus himself."

Get over yourself, Kevin. The "sanctimony" of the anti-Imus forces was driven by the reflexive racism, disingenuous argumentation, and willful ignorance of the pro-Imus forces.

Imus is on the record hiring Bernard McGuirk "to tell the nigger jokes". Anyone who hires a designated nigger joker is a racist scumbag. It is not sanctimonious to chastise racist scumbags.

Typical Kevin Drum. Dude, you never seem to hit all the right notes.

Posted by: Gabriel on April 16, 2007 at 3:41 PM | PERMALINK

Earth to Phil Nugent: In addition to being a "scary looking black man", Willie Horton was a murderer and a rapist. Governor Dukakis was rightly criticized for bad judgment in releasing this individual on furlough.

As I recall, the point of the furlought was supposed to be to get Horton acclimated to life outside of prison. It's unclear why someone serving a life sentence needed to be acclimated to non-prison life. It's unclear how the populace could gain by having this killer on the loose.

By ignoring what an individual has done, Nugent could criticize any strong action. E.g., I can imagine Nugent blasting Winston Churchill and FDR for going to war against a "scary-looking white man" and a "scary-looking yellow man."

Posted by: ex-liberal on April 16, 2007 at 3:41 PM | PERMALINK

t

Posted by: LfoD on April 16, 2007 at 3:44 PM | PERMALINK

Mr. Nugent should have given Howard Stern more of a chance. The view from the other side of these news conferences was quite different. One of Howard's points was that morning radio doesn't have to be local. Rather than pander to the particular local market he was entering, he would take the opportunity at these press conference to flaunt his complete ignorance of the local market to great comedic effect.

Posted by: Tom on April 16, 2007 at 3:45 PM | PERMALINK

What is interesting to me is that the worst element of the "nappy-headed ho" slur - "ho" - meaning whore - is more sexist than racist, and yet the sexism part seems easier to overlook than the racism part for everyone I've heard of discuss the matter except over at Shakesville.

Also, Kevin, does pointing this out and saying Imus's comment offends me as a woman really come across as "sanctimony"? If it does, I would like to suggest you recalibrate your sanctimony meter.

As a culture, we still need to be able to point out racism and sexism when we hear it without being called santimonious. Or whiny. Or bleeding heart. Or wimpy (Kevin, if you meant the label more narrowly, specifics would be nice)

Posted by: ananke on April 16, 2007 at 3:45 PM | PERMALINK

Sharpton, apparently is the only black person in America and represents all blacks on the planet. Apparently, blacks own all of the media outlets and content platforms and therefore can control their image. Blacks were responsible for booking Sharpton. And anti-imus people are just as bad as imus. And what about the shooting victims today, why are wallowing in victimhood? They should just move on and stop trying to blame the shooter. Kevin, why dont you get a few black friends to hang out with.

And the next time I screw up at work (something Imus did), I will say to my boss, "Well what about Sharpton? Why are you being so hypocrytical?" Does that work for any of you guys when you screw up at work?

Posted by: LFoD on April 16, 2007 at 3:50 PM | PERMALINK

I love how Howard Stern has progressed (in this excerpt at least) from being one of those awful shock jocks to being the guy who points out the ridiculousness of the genre. Maybe Stern is right; he *is* an original.

I remember when Stern used to be on WNBC in new york, and imus was on at the same time. billboard ads linked the two -- Imus in the morning! Stern in the afternoon! -- which apparently Howard hated because he could never stand Imus.

Posted by: SkippyFlipjack on April 16, 2007 at 3:50 PM | PERMALINK

Sharpton may not be the only black person in America, but he's the only one who consistently steps up to the media plate and defends blacks against racism in all forms. Sure, he's had a couple of big misses. But what would blacks do without him? Jesse Jackson's wiener has gone limp with age.

God Bless Al Sharpton.

Posted by: bob on April 16, 2007 at 4:07 PM | PERMALINK

Al at 2:21 says exactly the same as every other winger hack: Imus + Duke lacrosse prosecution. Do they have a central office somewhere?

Posted by: John Emerson on April 16, 2007 at 4:09 PM | PERMALINK

What would blacks do w/o Sharpton? Most blacks dont like sharpton. Only the media likes him, so they can beat up on him. If Sharpton/Jackson did not open their mouths and rap music did not exist, what would be the excuse then?

Posted by: LfoD on April 16, 2007 at 4:19 PM | PERMALINK

God Bless Al Sharpton.
Posted by: bob

Twana Brawley.

Posted by: MsNThrope on April 16, 2007 at 4:28 PM | PERMALINK

One can have no time for Imus without saying "God bless" to a guy who called for a "white interloper" to be driven from a neighborhood, and stood silent while an associate next to him asserted that a "cracker" would be made to "suffer", in the weeks preceding the white interloper's business being the site of mass murder. One doesn't have to say "God bless" regarding a guy who denounced "diamond merchants" at the funeral of young boy of African descent who was killed accidentally by a Hasidic Jew driving a car, a funeral which preceded a progrom which resulted a different Jew being murdered.

Of course, one doesn't have to invite such a person to speak at a national political convention, either, but that isn't as bad a calling on a deity to bless a person who engages in such actions.

Posted by: Will Allen on April 16, 2007 at 4:35 PM | PERMALINK

The New Orleans "guy" is actually two guys - Walton and Johnson.

They're still on the air.

Haven't listened to them in years, so I don't know if they still do the gay/black/redneck schtick, but they certainly beat it to death for years...

...actually, now that I check their website, I see that they do:

http://www.waltonandjohnson.com/main/

Posted by: banachspace on April 16, 2007 at 4:35 PM | PERMALINK

LfoD, I agree that Sharpton does not carry a lot of credibility with a large percentage of Americans of African descent, which makes it all the more bewildering that the leadership of the Democratic Party would so closely associate with someone with his track record.

Posted by: Will Allen on April 16, 2007 at 4:39 PM | PERMALINK

"pogrom", of course. Sheesh, I cannot type.

Posted by: Will Allen on April 16, 2007 at 4:42 PM | PERMALINK

"It's true that Imus made the scandal possible for contriving to build a sort of perfect storm situation around himself."

I think that's exactly right. It was a combination of circumstances that led to Imus's dismissal, including the fact that Imus's act was legitimized by the journalists and politicians who frequented his show. If Howard Stern had said the same thing, I don't think it would have had the impact that it did.

Posted by: Pocket Rocket on April 16, 2007 at 4:43 PM | PERMALINK

So AmericanHawk is now posting as sportsfan?

Posted by: Disputo on April 16, 2007 at 4:44 PM | PERMALINK

bob: Sharpton may not be the only black person in America, but he's the only one who consistently steps up to the media plate and defends blacks against racism in all forms

The trouble is, the biggest area of gain for blacks today isn't fighting racism -- it's education. Sharpton's defense of the Rutgers BB team was appropriate, but it won't affect their careers. OTOH, a lack of education, especially in the sciences, will affect their careers.

How many of you know that David Blackwell, Prof. Emeritus of Mathematics at UC Berkeley, is the co-creator of an entire field of mathematics? What would it mean if more black children took Blackwell as their model? If they believed that a natural career path for them was to become scientists? What would it mean if they (and we) demanded that inner city education was improved so that inner city kids would be technically qualified?

Until fairly recently, Blacks truly were victims. Focusing on their victimhood was useful approach to motivate the passage of civil rights acts, voting acts, affirmative action, etc. But, that approach is pretty much played out.

It's time for blacks to move to a new approach: becoming so well qualified that they naturally get the highest level jobs.

Posted by: ex-liberal on April 16, 2007 at 4:44 PM | PERMALINK

bob-

I'm one of those "lefty-moderates" who think words are just words...but I love you. Will you marry me?

Sincerely,

theperegrine

Posted by: theperegrine on April 16, 2007 at 4:45 PM | PERMALINK

A disturbing thing to consider is whether Imus would have gotten canned if the maniac at Virginia Tech had gone on his rampage last Monday, and driven the attention focused on Imus elsewhere. So much of our public morality, or at least it's realization in institutional behavior, is largely situationally driven.

Posted by: Will Allen on April 16, 2007 at 4:50 PM | PERMALINK

Given that the party our friend Will Allen reflexively supports on this board has its members, at the highest level (you don't get much higher than VP) go on the radio show of an unrepentant "Take the bone out of your nose" racist on a fairly regular business, Will has no credibility when complaining about anyone's race-baiting.

Didn't you, Will Allen, vote for the team that sends the VP to racist radio? Twice? Even after knowing that they had started a war of aggression against the Iraqi people (thereby endorsing their racist war with your vote)? How many people died because of Sharpton? How many people died because the Republican Party supported George W. Bush?

Posted by: noel on April 16, 2007 at 4:50 PM | PERMALINK

Noel, I have voted for Republicans less than 50% of the time in Presidential elections. If that makes me part of their party "reflexively", well, that simply indicates that you are either too dumb to grasp what the word "reflexive" means, or are simply a liar. Which is it?

Posted by: Will Allen on April 16, 2007 at 4:56 PM | PERMALINK

Disputo: So AmericanHawk is now posting as sportsfan?

I don't know. But he's not the only one who likes Pie.

You have to install firefox, the Greasemonkey plugin for firefox , and the Washington Monthly script for Greasemonkey. Then you can edit the page to www.washingtonmonthly.com/* and you can enter the offeners: i.e., var baddies = new Array("Al", "ex-liberal", "etc.");

Posted by: absent observer on April 16, 2007 at 4:56 PM | PERMALINK

Ralph Nader has the best commentary I've seen on the Don Imus matter.

Outrageous Words, Outrageous Deeds
by Ralph Nader
April 16, 2007
CommonDreams.org

Posted by: SecularAnimist on April 16, 2007 at 5:03 PM | PERMALINK

So AmericanHawk is now posting as sportsfan?
Posted by: Disputo

No, (pending word from above) I think sportsfan is an independent loony on a par with rdw

Posted by: MsNThrope on April 16, 2007 at 5:04 PM | PERMALINK

Next ex-liberal will be telling us about Percy Julian. Suggesting that blacks should concentrate on "becoming so well qualified that they naturally get the highest level jobs" belittles tha fact that many of the do become that qualified, but they don't get the highest level jobs.

That's not to say that kids today shouldn't aim for MBAs instead of the MBA.

Posted by: royalblue_tom on April 16, 2007 at 5:07 PM | PERMALINK

Re: Howard Stern. I only listened to him once about 25 years ago, on a long, long ride to the airport in a taxi. He could have been Imus, but at least he picked a victim who was more powerful (though it may not have seemed so at the time) than a few girl baskeball players. His victim of that day was African-American as well, no real surprise there. Stern was taunting Bill Cosby, whose career was then in the doldrums, with invitations to his audience to call in with "a few jokes for Bill," to help him out. It was sickening.

Of course, shortly thereafter Cosby got one of the most successful TV situation comedies of all time and is now one of the most wealthy men in America. Bet Howard hasn't mentioned him since then. I certainly didn't listen to find out if he would.

Posted by: David in NY on April 16, 2007 at 5:07 PM | PERMALINK

ex-liberal on April 16, 2007 at 4:44 PM:

..if they (and we) demanded that inner city education was improved so that inner city kids would be technically qualified?

As if that hasn't been happening for decades already, ex-lib...open your damned eyes.

So do you plan to address the real underlying issue with inner-city education - poverty - or are you going to shill for charter schools and school vouchers?

Posted by: grape_crush on April 16, 2007 at 5:11 PM | PERMALINK

I'm black, and have an MBA from an elite college and work as an analyst for a F500. Most of the blacks on TV are caricatures. None of the blacks on TV (except the journalists) are representative of the race. I find it condescending to talk about 'black problems'. What if I went to a poor community in Appalachia,, and used it to talk about what 'whites' need to do. there will always be poor people, but they are not representative of a particular race. It would be nice if the networks could find another black in the country besides sharpton.

Posted by: LfoD on April 16, 2007 at 5:19 PM | PERMALINK

absent observer,

And you also have to fix a couple bugs in the script....

Posted by: Disputo on April 16, 2007 at 5:20 PM | PERMALINK

ex-liberal, given that the basic sciences are quite low-paying, unless you go into medicine or engineering, I don't think that the poor should be taking science professors as a model. It's a formula for a long career of low-paying postdoctoral fellowships and fighting for one of a few limited professorships.

Posted by: Tyro on April 16, 2007 at 5:20 PM | PERMALINK

Absent observer(2:25)--

Let me help you out...

Stupid, there were 5000 comments attacking Nancy Grace. (full stop)

Posted by: Gracie Lou Freedub on April 16, 2007 at 5:24 PM | PERMALINK

As for Sharpton, I'll let him explain, as he did on Fox News Sunday. I haven't found video...and the linked transcript doesn't do the exchange justice. Chris Wallace tried to do Rev. Al like he tried to do Bill Clinton, and came off as a smarmy, uninformed turd - pretty much par for the course at FNC.

Just watching FNC so you don't have to. Y'all can thank me later.

Posted by: grape_crush on April 16, 2007 at 5:25 PM | PERMALINK

Kevin, would you explain the "sanctimonious" comment further? Who was being santimonious? In what way?

Posted by: EmmaAnne on April 16, 2007 at 5:31 PM | PERMALINK

grape_crush,

Thanks - Now, if you take over the Five PM PST time, I could concentrate on Olbermann, instead of switching back and forth between BillO's Entertainment Special and Keith.

Do let us know if BillO says anything "Pithy".

And, I pity you for your endeavor, but give Kudos for your fortitude.

Posted by: thethirdPaul on April 16, 2007 at 5:43 PM | PERMALINK

Well, Anenke, your point is well-taken... its all about the racism, isn't it? Even though Imus was brought down in large part not by Sharpton, but rather by ticked off female staffers at NBC, a well-timed editorial by Gwen Ifill, and of course the utterly dignified statements of the Rutgers coach and team.

The real lesson from the Imus imbroglio is that diversity works just like we (liberals, feminists) said it would. Get more of our people on the inside, and eventually you'll start to see a difference in the outcomes of decision-making.

Posted by: Ciccina on April 16, 2007 at 5:49 PM | PERMALINK

What is interesting to me is that the worst element of the "nappy-headed ho" slur - "ho" - meaning whore - is more sexist than racist, and yet the sexism part seems easier to overlook than the racism part for everyone I've heard of discuss the matter except over at Shakesville.

1. I'd like to see how you're measuring "sexist" versus "racist". Imus would have never called them "hos" if they were black men *or* white women, so I see that as a wash wrt intent on Imus' part.

2. I don't think the sexist part is overlooked so much as the organized push back was coming initially and primarily from black organizations, and so influenced the terms of the public debate. If NOW or other women's organizations has jumped on this with as much fervor as PUSH, while PUSH had just issued press releases, you'd have since the emphasis inverted.

Posted by: Disputo on April 16, 2007 at 5:58 PM | PERMALINK

Not your best by a long shot KEvin.

Gabriel puts it well:

"I may be almost as tired of the sanctimony of the anti-Imus forces as I am of the revolting phenomenon of Don Imus himself."

Get over yourself, Kevin. The "sanctimony" of the anti-Imus forces was driven by the reflexive racism, disingenuous argumentation, and willful ignorance of the pro-Imus forces.

Imus is on the record hiring Bernard McGuirk "to tell the nigger jokes". Anyone who hires a designated nigger joker is a racist scumbag. It is not sanctimonious to chastise racist scumbags."

If your name was Markos Moulitsas, you'd be facing a blogger boycott right now.

Posted by: Armando on April 16, 2007 at 6:01 PM | PERMALINK

grape_crush wrote: "...if they (and we) demanded that inner city education was improved so that inner city kids would be technically qualified?"

As if that hasn't been happening for decades already, ex-lib...open your damned eyes.

Sadly, it hasn't been happening. The average black student is 4 years behind his/her white counterpart. That's what today's education is producing.

So do you plan to address the real underlying issue with inner-city education - poverty

Many years ago, I attended an inner city school in a poor neighborhood through sixth grade. Yet, when I moved to a more upscale suburban school system, I was not behind. Poverty alone is not the problem. We will never end poverty, but that's no excuse for letting so many kids fester in rotten schools.

- or are you going to shill for charter schools and school vouchers?

Right. Children in bad schools should have alternatives -- a means to escape. Also even a decent school may not be working some of its students. They should have the opportunity to try something else. All students (and their parents) should have a choice, not just the rich ones.

P.S. the enormous growth of Home Schooling is evidence of how bad our schools are. Parents are turning down the free use of professional teachers and education structures. They feel that they can do better, despite having no training and without a structure behind them. And, statistics show that they are doing better.

Posted by: ex-liberal on April 16, 2007 at 6:01 PM | PERMALINK

Phil Nugent delivers the first Don Imus rant that actually kept me semi-riveted all the way to the end

Drop the pretense. You are as fascinated as anyone else.

Posted by: spider on April 16, 2007 at 6:03 PM | PERMALINK

Disputo, from what I've read, Imus has referred to his wife as a "ho", as charming as that is. I presume that she is white, given I've never seen it reported that Imus is married to a black woman.

Posted by: Will Allen on April 16, 2007 at 6:04 PM | PERMALINK

Wow.

Imus calls his wife a "ho" on the air?

I'm speechless.

That guy is more of an asshole than I had possibly imagined.

Posted by: Disputo on April 16, 2007 at 6:16 PM | PERMALINK

Nobody says what we are all thinking when we hear Nappy headed Ho.Condi Rice.

Posted by: ALan Hawk on April 16, 2007 at 6:26 PM | PERMALINK

Disputo, I don't know where you get the idea that Imus wouldn't have called the women whores if they were white. Aren't you trying to say he *isn't* sexist? I find that fascinating.

In addition, I don't think you really know where the "organized push" was coming from. The media chooses to highlight their darlings, and that usually doesn't reflect what's happening on the ground. The Feminist Majority was on this from the beginning, but the media doesn't pay attention to them unless some wackjob has spitroasted a fetus or something, and even then you're more likely to get Gloria Alred. Don't mistake what you see on the tee-vee for reality. From what I've heard, the real and truly influential pushback was from staff, journalists, and concerned individuals from the ranks of the sponsors.

Posted by: Ciccina on April 16, 2007 at 6:27 PM | PERMALINK
...becoming so well qualified that they naturally get the highest level jobs. ex-lax on at 4:44 PM
I have never known a time in America in which Being Born Black wasn't a count against the person.
It would be nice if the networks could find another black in the country besides sharpton.LfoD at 5:19 PM
Why can't the program bookers find anyone else? Apparently, they don't know of anyone else. That in itself shows their lack of knowledge of the current African-American culture.
... The average black student is 4 years behind his/her white counterpart... ex-lax at 6:01 PM
4 years behind, if true, is proof of discrimination and irrelevant to the discussion as is the rest of your comment. Red herrings are not alibis for racism. Home schooling is a measure of Evangelical prejudice against knowledge.
,,, presume that she is white...Will Allen at 6:04 PM
She is white and received some press from her request that Imus supporters stop sending hate mail and death threats to the girls of Rutgers. Posted by: Mike on April 16, 2007 at 6:28 PM | PERMALINK

Everyone's trying to put Imus in historical and cultural context in order to make sense out of his popularity and whether he is "no worse than" others who are equally offensive. Consistency and parity are not necessarily virtues when it comes to public speech norms.

Posted by: Martin on April 16, 2007 at 6:32 PM | PERMALINK

ex-liberal: would vouchers allow a poor family to send their children to whatever schools they chose?
If private schools were forced by law to accept a school voucher as sufficient tuition, that might be a good idea.
If, on the other hand, it's just the money that the school district spends on him, and all those other schools can refuse to admit a kid on a voucher, how is that an improved choice?
If a kid's education is suffering from inadequate funding, how is it a good idea giving the kid his inadequate portion and bidding his parents to go find another school--which, if it depends on the vouchers for money, will also be a poor school?

Posted by: pbg on April 16, 2007 at 6:32 PM | PERMALINK

"That guy is more of an asshole than I had possibly imagined."

... because its one thing to call women you've never met whores to an audience of millions of listeners, but to say it about your wife is, well, extra bad..??

Posted by: Ciccina on April 16, 2007 at 6:34 PM | PERMALINK

Home schooling - Still wonder what would have worse; home schooling by Barb or spending frivilous hours at Phillips Exeter, Yale and Harvard? Tough call.

Yes, would the pundits' booking agents please take both Sharpton and Jackson out of their automatic "racial" call up as well as Falwell, Robertson and Dobson out of the "religious" one.

Posted by: thethirdPaul on April 16, 2007 at 6:40 PM | PERMALINK

Nobody says what we are all thinking when we hear Nappy headed Ho

I think of malnourished, maltreated, dressed in rags, unbathed slave children that European, Christian owners sexually abused. That is why it is a detestable epithet to me.

Posted by: Brojo on April 16, 2007 at 6:47 PM | PERMALINK

As Wilton Mizner once said:

Treat a whore like a lady, and a wife like a whore.

Ah, the slings and arrows descend.

Posted by: stupid git on April 16, 2007 at 6:49 PM | PERMALINK

Aren't you trying to say he *isn't* sexist? I find that fascinating.

Good lawd, can you not read? My argument was that it was equally racist and sexist (it is a "wash"). Don't start attacking me with ridiculous strawmen just because you have no response to my question.

In addition, I don't think you really know where the "organized push" was coming from.... The Feminist Majority was on this from the beginning, but the media doesn't pay attention to them unless some wackjob has spitroasted a fetus or something, and even then you're more likely to get Gloria Alred. Don't mistake what you see on the tee-vee for reality.

Boy, you're just full of the insults today, aren't you? Right, I'm just sitting in front of my TV all day.... can't argue the facts, so you just attack, huh?

Look, you were complaining because Imus' sexism wasn't getting as much TV play as his racism, I explained to you why that is (black organizations were pushing this much harder than women's orgs getting most of the media attention), and now you are complaining about and belitting black organizations that were getting most of the media attention? At least make up your mind what you are arguing about.

Oh, yeah, I was out there supporting PUSH. WTF were you and the Feminist Majority doing?

Posted by: Disputo on April 16, 2007 at 6:51 PM | PERMALINK

because its one thing to call women you've never met whores to an audience of millions of listeners, but to say it about your wife is, well, extra bad..??

That you don't even understand the difference between the words "ho" and "whore" goes far toward explaining why you don't understand how "ho" is racist.

I'm out of this argument until you get off your kneejerk soapbox and familiarize yourself with the basic issues.

Posted by: Disputo on April 16, 2007 at 6:55 PM | PERMALINK

her request that Imus supporters stop sending hate mail and death threats to the girls of Rutgers

Wow. Every new thing I hear about Imus and his supporters forces me to make a new category to place him in.

Posted by: Disputo on April 16, 2007 at 6:57 PM | PERMALINK

Brojo, how do you carry the load? My God, man! Hair shirts are sooo 1425. I know you actually do stuff to help, so give yourself a break. Your melancholia isn't helping anyone, it is only making you miserable. (And sometimes you're contagious). I don't think you deserve to feel miserable for the sins committed by others before you were even born. Lighten up on yourself.

Posted by: Blue Girl, Red State (aka G.C.) on April 16, 2007 at 7:02 PM | PERMALINK

Disputo - time for the pre-dinner drink, guy. Holy cow. Have a problem with anger, much?

Posted by: Ciccina on April 16, 2007 at 7:08 PM | PERMALINK

Disputo:Every new thing I hear about Imus and his supporters forces me to make a new category to place him in.

maybe you should say, him and his supporters? I spent a lot of time in the car on Saturday listening to talk radio blowhards talk about how he's being crucified for one mistake. Everything he said before is now down the memory hole.

I agree with what Gwen Ifill (the reporter he once called "the cleaning lady") said yesterday. To parpahrase her: He's not sorry for what he said. He's sorry he got caught.

Posted by: thersites on April 16, 2007 at 7:08 PM | PERMALINK

BGRS: I don't think you deserve to feel miserable for the sins committed by others before you were even born.

You might be right that Brojo shouldn't take on so much of the load for himself, but if you imagine that the "I think of malnourished, maltreated, dressed in rags, unbathed slave children that European, Christian owners sexually abused." is in the past you're not paying attention. Okay, they're not formally slaves, and not formally owned, but rich white men (and, to be fair, rich men of other races too) are still exploiting the misery of young women.

Posted by: thersites on April 16, 2007 at 7:13 PM | PERMALINK

Disputo:Every new thing I hear about Imus and his supporters forces me to make a new category to place him in.

My personal experience with his listeners has not been good. Last year, when Ana Marie Cox appeared on his show promoting her book, his listeners came out in force to her book reading that evening and the results were not pretty. They really disrupted the event. My take on it was above, but this guy described the scene well.

Posted by: Constantine on April 16, 2007 at 7:15 PM | PERMALINK

Have a problem with anger, much?

Yeah, I get angry when people insult me for no reason. What is your excuse?

Posted by: Disputo on April 16, 2007 at 7:32 PM | PERMALINK

That image of slave children came to me when I was trying to explain what 'nappy headed' meant to an English as a second language person. He did not know 'ho' was slang for whore, either.

I feel bad for those children, even if they are lost in the spirals of time.

Posted by: Brojo on April 16, 2007 at 7:35 PM | PERMALINK

He's not sorry for what he said. He's sorry he got caught.

No doubt about that. I find it especially repugnant that he keeps pointing to his supposed good deeds as if they offset the evil he has done. They do not.

Posted by: Disputo on April 16, 2007 at 7:43 PM | PERMALINK

Will Allen, that you have defended yourself against an attack not made demonstrates that you have the reading comprehension of a slow five-year-old, or you are embarassed to admit that you do, in fact, reflexively attack anyone to the left of Ben Stein on this board, or (I suppose) it could be that you have proffered the "liar" attack as a bit of projection. Whatever the answer, you certainly failed in your rather pathetic attempt to distract from your support for the violent regime that attacked the people of Iraq.

The question isn't who you voted for 30-years-ago, the question is whether those who have most currently earned your vote play nicely with the racists. The Democrats don't have the same connection to Sharpton that the people you voted for do with Limbaugh. And Sharpton isn't a cheerleader for the mass slaughter of anyone - something you can't say either for Limbaugh or yourself.

Posted by: noel on April 16, 2007 at 8:07 PM | PERMALINK

That image of slave children came to me when I was trying to explain what 'nappy headed' meant to an English as a second language person. He did not know 'ho' was slang for whore, either.

I feel bad for those children, even if they are lost in the spirals of time.

Posted by: Brojo on April 16, 2007 at 7:35 PM | PERMALINK

Are those the same "spirals of time" (WTF?) that enable you to --- after six years of George Bush's --- still defend your vote for Ralph Nader? A vote, which of course, helped make his election possible? Just curious.

Posted by: Pat on April 16, 2007 at 8:09 PM | PERMALINK

I'm paying attention, thanks. I know horrible and atrocious things are happening. I was specifically addressing the past based on previous interactions with Brojo.

Posted by: Blue Girl, Red State (aka G.C.) on April 16, 2007 at 8:17 PM | PERMALINK

No, noel, you illiterate twit, you prefaced you remarks, with this assertion....

"Given that the party our friend Will Allen reflexively supports on this board has its members....."

....which either proves you don't know what the term "reflexively" means, since I haven't voted for the Republican candidate for Presiden even 50% or more of the time in the last five elections, and less frequently in other races, or you are a liar. Well, are you a moron, or a liar?

As to your other idiocies, does the Democratic Party normally give one of the finite number of speaking slots at their convention to people they aren't closely connected to? Just how dumb are you?

Posted by: Will Allen on April 16, 2007 at 8:27 PM | PERMALINK

@ David in NY

"Bet Howard hasn't mentioned him [Bill Cosby] since then"

Thats a bet you'd lose.

Posted by: vividu on April 16, 2007 at 8:29 PM | PERMALINK

Everyone who thinks Phil was comparing Howard Stern to Imus needs to go back and re-read that anecdote. Phil's comparison is between the New Orleans dude and Imus.

Posted by: Andrew on April 16, 2007 at 8:37 PM | PERMALINK

pbg: I have never known a time in America in which Being Born Black wasn't a count against the person.

It's both a count against and a count for. A few years ago, my company CEO asked me to fill a vacancy with a minority. This was a well-paid position requiring a high degree of math skills I hired an Asian woman. He chewed me out, explaining that he meant me to hire a black.

In fact, there had been no black applicants. Unfortunately, the number of qualified blacks is quite small. A black person who achieves ordinary qualifications in this field will instantly have a wide choice of job offers.

pbg: If private schools were forced by law to accept a school voucher as sufficient tuition, that might be a good idea.

Yes, the late Milton Friedman, who popularized vouchers, favored large vouchers that would pay full tuition at a typical private or parochial school.

If a kid's education is suffering from inadequate funding, how is it a good idea giving the kid his inadequate portion and bidding his parents to go find another school--which, if it depends on the vouchers for money, will also be a poor school?

Money is always nice, but it's not the reason inner city schools are bad. Most of these schools have lots of money. Washington D.C. spends more per pupil than most districts.

I see the inadequate vouchers as a stepping stone. Vouchers of, say, $2000 - $3000, aren't enough to pay a full tuition. However, if vouchers are tried and if they prove successful, they may be raised over time. At least, I hope so. That's the best hope for black advancement IMHO.

Posted by: ex-liberal on April 16, 2007 at 8:40 PM | PERMALINK

Disputo, I think you just read stuff that isn't there. Okay, point by point:

"Good lawd, can you not read? My argument was that it was equally racist and sexist (it is a "wash"). Don't start attacking me with ridiculous strawmen just because you have no response to my question."

-- You said Imus would not have called a man or a white woman a "ho" (which is commonly understood to mean whore). I wasn't sure what to make of that, but presumed it meant the insult wasn't generically sexist. I know you also called it a "wash" - equally sexist and racist, so they cancel each other out - but I don't get the logic there.

"Boy, you're just full of the insults today, aren't you? Right, I'm just sitting in front of my TV all day.... can't argue the facts, so you just attack, huh?"

"Look, you were complaining because Imus' sexism wasn't getting as much TV play as his racism, I explained to you why that is (black organizations were pushing this much harder than women's orgs getting most of the media attention), and now you are complaining about and belitting black organizations that were getting most of the media attention? At least make up your mind what you are arguing about."

-- I wasn't complaining about Imus's sexism not getting as much tv play as his racism. I was commenting on how in discussions of the Imus situation, commenters dwell almost exclusively on the racist aspect with nary a nod towards the sexism. Further, I was saying that the ongoing commentary is re-writing the story of what happened. Because what happened was Imus was brought down by a dual concern over racism and sexism, by individuals who were concerned about both. Some of these individuals have been more focused on one issue or the other, but concern about both issues played a significant - I would venture to say equal - role. But in the re-hashing of the story, the importance of the reaction to sexism is steadily being erased.

-- I never complained about or belittled black organizations. Not sure where you got that from. All I am saying is that (I am betting) you don't really know how much any given organization worked to get their message out. You are assuming that because sexism isn't getting as much coverage, women's organizations must not have worked as hard or as early. The fact is that some people (like Sharpton) are in the rolodex, and others aren't. Whether you are "insider" or "outsider" basically dictates whether the MSM gives you a platform - not expertise, not grassroots support, not organizational effort. That's why I mentioned Gloria Alred - even if the MSM were going to cover sexism, they would most likely turn to a "personality" like her rather than someone with more credibility.

-- Further, you seem to be saying that racism is the predominant topic in the MSM because black organizations were out front in framing the story, assuming they pushed racism to the exclusion of sexism. I don't think that's true.

-- The reasons why sexism hasn't been discussed, I propose, are: (1) for a great many people, it is a lot more uncomfortable to talk about misogyny than to talk about racism; (2) other people think it is a non-issue; and (3) still other people think its an issue but it doesn't concern them / its not important / they couldn't care less.

"Oh, yeah, I was out there supporting PUSH. WTF were you and the Feminist Majority doing?"

-- Um, good for you re: PUSH. You seem to think I work for the Feminist Majority or something; I don't. But as for what I was doing... well, I'd tell ya, but then I'd have to k... oh, you know.

Posted by: Ciccina on April 16, 2007 at 8:43 PM | PERMALINK

Money is always nice, but it's not the reason inner city schools are bad. Most of these schools have lots of money. Washington D.C. spends more per pupil than most districts.

Have you ever seen the inside of a Washington, DC public school? What do you think that their crumbling infrastructure should be fixed with? Fairy dust? I'll take money, thanks very much.

Posted by: Constantine on April 16, 2007 at 9:01 PM | PERMALINK

Will, you illiterate toad, you even managed to quote the phrase "on this board" and still not understand what that phrase means. Talking about what you did in secret (we have no evidence for your voting record and it wouldn't matter if we did) long ago tells us little about what you've done on this board. If you had the wit of a blind squirrel it would at least give you a chance to come up with an insult more clever than "how dumb are you." Perhaps you should go back to searching for your nuts.

As to your attempts to deflect from the racists that are at the heart of the tribe you continually support on this board, you've got nothing. Even if Sharpton were 1% as bad as the racists and sexists (remind me who popularized that neologism "feminazi"?) that Dick Cheney pals around with it still wouldn't give you a point. See, the Presidential candidates you've consistently voted for over the past decade have murdered (at lowest estimate) tens of thousands of human beings. Their ever-shifting rationales for why those people had to die demonstrates a clear disregard for human life. That they are brown skinned makes it an easy sell to the racists.

The facts remain Will Allen, promoter of death, you have no standing to complain about someone else's historical racism while those you support still practice it in the most violent manner possible.

Posted by: noel on April 16, 2007 at 10:03 PM | PERMALINK

I think if you check this years transcripts of Imus show you will find he declared himself a Republican. Imus lived by the sword, he died by it. He suffered the fate of all shock jocks which is they will eventually tick off a target and be driven from the air. The only lesson to be learned from the entire episode is if you hire a bigot, pair him with a bigot producer, let him get away for years with all sorts of racist, anti semitic, homophobic slurs, he will cross a line and your corporation will ultimately be humiliated.

Posted by: aline on April 16, 2007 at 10:20 PM | PERMALINK

The point, noel, you squealing chimp, is that a sample size of two elections (which is the only example on this board where I've indicated support for the Republican party; Bush v. Gore, and Bush v. Kerrey) does not provide any chance to determine whether a person's choice is "reflexive", thus making it necessary, whenever possible, to examine a larger sample size, in order to test the hypothesis of a reflexive nature. Do you have any notion at all regarding the meanings of the words you write? Anything even approximating a glimmer of insight? Or do you just stumble around in the ether, randomly sending signals through copper and fiber optics, in the hope that purely by chance a rational thought may appear, mirage-like, in the vast wasteland that is your mind?

Go fling your feces elsewhere.

Posted by: Will Allen on April 16, 2007 at 10:51 PM | PERMALINK

Are those the same "spirals of time" (WTF?) that enable you to... defend your vote for Ralph Nader?

Yeats spoke of spirals of time. Constitutional rights make me think I can vote for whomever I desire without abuse from DLC enforcers.

It is curious my reference to the abuse of slave children stimulates you to respond to my voting preferences.

Posted by: Brojo on April 16, 2007 at 11:02 PM | PERMALINK

Willie Boy Allen:

... a sample size of two elections (which is the only example on this board where I've indicated support for the Republican party; Bush v. Gore, and Bush v. Kerrey) does not provide any chance to determine whether a person's choice is "reflexive", thus making it necessary, whenever possible, to examine a larger sample size, in order to test the hypothesis of a reflexive nature.

You have no idea what you're talking about, do you? Any man who has to switch between parties over a period of say four or five Presidential elections is a feckless, meandering soul who believes in nothing.

Let me spell it out for you sir: It goes, Nixon, Ford, Reagan, Reagan, Bush I, Bush I, Dole, Bush II and Bush II for me. That's my voting record for the last thirty-five years. That's what I believe in. If you're claiming you voted for Democrats in that mix, WHICH ONES? Carter? Dukakis? Mondale? And spare me the outrage you're foisting on others--if you haven't voted straight Republican since before 1972, then there is something so seriously wrong with you I doubt whether it can be addressed in polite society.

Do you have any notion at all regarding the meanings of the words you write? Anything even approximating a glimmer of insight? Or do you just stumble around in the ether, randomly sending signals through copper and fiber optics, in the hope that purely by chance a rational thought may appear, mirage-like, in the vast wasteland that is your mind?

What is stunning is that this para represents you quite effectively, Willie Boy. You're not a conservative in any sense of the word--you're a lost and wandering Internet crank, and we get a lot of them here. You profess to be conservative only because conservatives are usually the ones on the outs around here. And when real conservatives like myself parse your weak and pathetic arguments (because, really, what fun is it to parse Bush Sux!!! over and over again?) you hop up and down and holler your little epithets and get your Internet jollies over being noticed.

And that's what you crave--someone to notice that you're in pain, can't connect with people, and you're certainly not political in any way. You're just pathetic, in every way.

Go fling your feces elsewhere.

Said the monkey with poo congealed in his fist...

Posted by: Norman Rogers on April 16, 2007 at 11:18 PM | PERMALINK

No, Norman, I'm not a conservative, have never claimed to be a conservative, and your mind is apparently incapable of logical reasoning. Sheesh.

You also apparently have abandoned your regimen of distilled water and pure grain alcohol.

Posted by: Will Allen on April 16, 2007 at 11:29 PM | PERMALINK

No, Norman, I'm not a conservative, have never claimed to be a conservative, and your mind is apparently incapable of logical reasoning. Sheesh.

Oh, you're a whiner who can't choose a side. I apologize--all that bluster you gave off must have been from a pathetic, lonely man who cannot connect with others and just wants to be noticed. Sorry, I was SOOOO-OO wrong about that...

You also apparently have abandoned your regimen of distilled water and pure grain alcohol.

No, just a fine wine now and then, the good stuff, the stuff clowns like you have never tasted. I enjoy the finer things. I know exactly where I stand and I have no misgivings or qualms about what I believe in. That's why I give liberals hell and tell people how things really are.

You just beg to be noticed. How sad is that?

Posted by: Will Allen on April 16, 2007 at 11:29 PM | PERMALINK

Posted by: Norman Rogers on April 16, 2007 at 11:37 PM | PERMALINK

Norman, do women sense your power?

Posted by: Will Allen on April 17, 2007 at 12:19 AM | PERMALINK

Is it just me, or has the quality of Norman's performance art improved over time? At first he was just angry at Kevin and his posts were non-stop insults about how stupid he thought Kevin was. Now he's spinning off into a feces-flinging fan of hostility towards just about everyone. It's really a thing of beauty, in a multi-car accident on the highway sort of way.

Posted by: Constantine on April 17, 2007 at 12:45 AM | PERMALINK

But I think if Imus is to be fired, Rosie O'Donnell should also be fired for her racism against Chinese people on the View.

(Give me a break. If we started a list of "who should be fired", right-wingers better get a very large bus for their own. )

It was wonderful to read something on the subject that didn't sound like the same old overkill. Thank you.

Posted by: T4TX_T4TN on April 17, 2007 at 12:46 AM | PERMALINK

WTF? I tune in just in time for a will allen/Norman Rogers smackdown? cool!

noel: do we really want to be defending Sharpton (who, you gotta admit, is a loose cannon at best)by saying comparatively that he's better than Rush Limbaugh? isn't that setting the bar kind of low?

Posted by: URK on April 17, 2007 at 1:03 AM | PERMALINK

Poor Will, his support over the last decade for the party of death means nothing to him. He picked the least capable of the three candidates twice and is defensive about it. Here's a hint you partisan hack - every post you've made on Political Animal and Washington Monthly has been about how bad the Democrats are. You are reflexively (that word you seem not to understand) anti-Democratic and continually spout nonsense about the party and about any individual who points out your intellectual weaknesses. I'm sorry that you can't simply admit that the party where you've cast your vote for President in the last decade is the party of racism and death (also incompetence, mendacity, and greed).

It's a simple thing Mr. Allen:

I, Will Allen, have spent the last eight years (or so) attacking nearly every Democrat mentioned on this board and voting for the least competent man ever to disgrace the office of President and have continued to support his policies even as they have led to massive death and destruction of brown-skinned people far away. It has not been my intent to be a racist asshole, that my positions are indistinguishable from said racist assholes is purely an artifact of my limited ability to reason. It is that same limited ability to reason that allows me to support the friends of those whose racist, sexist and homophobic rants continue every day and attempt to deflect attention away from that support by mentioning events from nearly two decades ago which are neither relevant nor reflect the degree and depth of hatemongering I've supported with my vote.
The only difference between that and another one of your charming personal attacks is that it doesn't contain any of what you smeared on the wall next to the crib your warders put you to bed in each night.

Oops, you're right, it differs in two other respects - first, it is clearly written and second, it is true.

Posted by: noel on April 17, 2007 at 1:07 AM | PERMALINK

URK, I haven't defended Sharpton, I've attacked the partisan hack Will Allen for bringing Sharpton into the discussion as if somehow the Democrats were the party of racism because of bad acts by a Democrat years ago. Sorry if that wasn't clear. And, let's be honest, Limbaugh is only the loudest of the racists in Will Allen's tribe. He is, in fact, a little more circumspect than those who don't have quite his audience - in the same way that Reagan was more circumspect than Thurmond because he too had to appear before a national audience.

Posted by: noel on April 17, 2007 at 1:15 AM | PERMALINK

noel, help is available. Now, how many of my posts must I reprint here which do not mention Democrats, before you will understand the depth of your psychosis? Also, you really don't understand at all what you write, do you? Even if your latest assertion were true, which it isn't, to say that a person is reflexively anti-x is not the same thing as saying the person is reflexively pro-y. Not even close. You are astoundingly dim-witted. Congratulations.

Why anybody would think it notable that a personal attack would be returned in kind is always a source of wonder, or would be, if it were not so easily explained by a cretinous mind.

Posted by: Will Allen on April 17, 2007 at 1:30 AM | PERMALINK

noel, you incomparably illiterate dunce, it was not me who introduced Sharpton into the discussion. Are you able to get through a Dr. Seuss book and accurately summarize it's content?

You really should consider filing suit against more than one educational institution.

Posted by: Will Allen on April 17, 2007 at 1:36 AM | PERMALINK

Norman, do women sense your power?

Sir, they go weak in the knees and I've actually seen puddles form.

Is it just me, or has the quality of Norman's performance art improved over time?

Thank you for finally noticing. No, I have no beef with Drum. He's too liberal and he's quick to send his interns to delete anything that might upset this teetering apple cart. I am here to explain how things work, and I do it well. What's missing is a real liberal voice of reason, someone smart and charming who can actually debate without firing off profanities and lies.

Posted by: Norman Rogers on April 17, 2007 at 8:25 AM | PERMALINK

No, I have no beef with Drum.

Ahem. We remember your "Dumbo" name-calling phase.

Posted by: Constantine on April 17, 2007 at 9:45 AM | PERMALINK

Ahem. We remember your "Dumbo" name-calling phase.

Well, Kevin Dumbo was appropo in those days. Thankfully, he's improved. Witness any number of attacks levelled against him by the wooly-headed hippie liberals who have shouted down all of their reasoned opponents. This blog is full of Nader voters who screech about vegan food, slaughtering animals for food, Wicca, atheism--why, if I want to talk about Native Americans, I cannot even use the term "Honest Injun" without invoking a firestorm of protest. I can't even make a reference to how Bill Clinton is the Democratic Party's tar baby--once he gets part of someone, they are attached to him and beholden to him.

I can't even talk about my two fists--Archibald and Haymaker--without some liberal getting huffy at me. And never mind me talking about my wealth, my good looks, or my love life.

Posted by: Norman Rogers on April 17, 2007 at 10:01 AM | PERMALINK

BGRS --

A little late, my apologies for accusing you of "not paying attention." I would have said what I was trying to say differently but it was the end of a long day and I.

Posted by: thersites on April 17, 2007 at 10:07 AM | PERMALINK

Nugent's screed wouldn't even make your blog Kevin. Beyond being a Dennis Miller-like liberal rant, it's so filled with generalizations and stereotyping of the kind that has painted the left tag of snobbery whether deserved or undeserved. That's why it was only worth one paragraph of notice, not the Op-Ed Page of the New York Times. Their standards tend to be higher and they also do not drop F-bombs either.

Posted by: Sean Scallon on April 17, 2007 at 10:08 AM | PERMALINK

by saying comparatively that he's better than Rush Limbaugh? isn't that setting the bar kind of low?

It's setting the bar at it's max. Rush is the pinnacle. He is by far the most influencial man in the media, TV, Radio or Print. All of the racism, sexism charges are merely standard operating prodedure for the jealous chattering classes trying to take him down. It's just not possible. He owns Talk Radio for a reason. He's a smart, articulate guy with a terrific sense of humor and a loving soul. He cares deeply about America and our future. It's fine to disagree with him. That's what Democracy is all about. But don't count on him going away. He is exceptionally skilled at his craft and extremely useful.

That's why Dick Cheney will often go in with Rush for 20 minutes or longer fairly frequently. He can reach 30x's as many people as the NYTs immediately and then as other radio shows, blogs and Fox pick up the feed his reach exceeds that of the MSM.

Reagan felt he had to meet with the Editorial board of the NYTs often. Rush is why Bush ignores the NYTs completely and why Cheney wil take a smaller plan just so he can kick them off his plane. These two have pissed on the NYTs and the NYTs has been unable to do anything about it. That's Rush. That's power.

Posted by: rdw on April 17, 2007 at 11:19 AM | PERMALINK

Noel,

You need to bury your extreme anger. Trashing others adds nothing to the debate while trashing the party that keeps beating you makes it more likely they'll keep on beating you. You can't win being silly. Republicans are smart with Rush especially smart. He's not the one whinning about losing for a reason. You are the one whinning for a reason.

Try thinking and reasoning. Rush is far from a racists and your relaince on old stereotypes is counter-productive. You lost in 2000 and again in 2004. Get over it and nominate a decent candidate.

Posted by: rdw on April 17, 2007 at 11:30 AM | PERMALINK

Will, if you start by calling someone either dumb or a liar you really have no grounds to wonder why they respond to your personal attacks in kind.

Show me the personal attack you simple-minded mental patient:

Given that the party our friend Will Allen reflexively supports on this board has its members, at the highest level (you don't get much higher than VP) go on the radio show of an unrepentant "Take the bone out of your nose" racist on a fairly regular business, Will has no credibility when complaining about anyone's race-baiting.

Didn't you, Will Allen, vote for the team that sends the VP to racist radio? Twice? Even after knowing that they had started a war of aggression against the Iraqi people (thereby endorsing their racist war with your vote)? How many people died because of Sharpton? How many people died because the Republican Party supported George W. Bush?
You idiotically responded with personal attacks in order to distract from your support for racists and their enablers on this board.

You might not have been the one to introduce Sharpton, but you are the one who keeps trying to pretend that he is a greater offender than your tribesmen and that the Democrats must repudiate him for crimes committed decades ago - while your tribesmen use a far broader platform to egg on mass murder.

As to your inability to see that constantly condemning one side and voting for the other side as a demonstration of partisanship - well you aren't fooling anyone, not even your minders in the ward who give you net access on a lark.

Posted by: noel on April 17, 2007 at 11:32 AM | PERMALINK

You are a coward Pat. Why don't you post any comments about what you think so I can call you out on your hipocracies? You don't because you are a coward, much like Gore was a coward in Florida. Much like Gore's campaign strategy was one of cowardice. Much like Gore's support for his wife's censorship campaign was a coward's errand. Mainstream Democrats are cowards, who have to vote for W. Bush's wars so they can be reelected so they can share some of the graft. Even Gore would have voted to invade Iraq, just like Kerry, your god, and Clinton did. Why don't you explain their votes for Bush's war to the independent voters?

You are an anonymous coward like the DLC organization Americans for Jobs who smeared Dean. DLC illiterate pussies like yourself have no difficulty harrassing Nader voters and anti-war advocates, but love Murtha while he jets around in a defense contractor's plane on his way to a beach house vacation paid for by another defense contractor. Follow me around you Tipper worshipper, everytime you fuck with me is just another good point why Gore Democrats are weak sucks unworthy of a compassionate, thinking person's vote.

I bother you because I care about children. I bother you because I care about justice. I bother you because I am so much smarter than you. I lecture you because you are a Tipper Gore censor. I irritate you because you want to rape little Arab girs. I bother you because I read poetry. You are a DLC Freeper. You are a DLC stalker. You are a DLC goon.

Posted by: Brojo on April 17, 2007 at 11:33 AM | PERMALINK

Preserve your essence, Norman.

Posted by: Will Allen on April 17, 2007 at 11:40 AM | PERMALINK

As a bona fide southerner, born in '64, I can say that I also heard the lines related by the author.

Posted by: Tony Shifflett on April 17, 2007 at 11:43 AM | PERMALINK
.... Rush is far from a racists... rightist dim wit at 11:30 AM
There are ample examples of racism by Rush Limbaugh and other Republican spokespersons. Now wonder you have to cheat to win elections. r-e-l-i-a-n-c-e, r-a-c-i-s-t Posted by: Mike on April 17, 2007 at 11:46 AM | PERMALINK
... Rush is the pinnacle. ....rightist dim wit at 11:19 AM
i-n-f-l-u-e-n-t-i-a-l, p-r-o-c-e-d-u-r-e, Rush Limbaugh is a big, fat idiot and only influences whackos.

According to a June 7, 2000, Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR) article, "As a young broadcaster in the 1970s, Limbaugh once told a black caller: 'Take that bone out of your nose and call me back.' " In the early 1990s, "after becoming nationally syndicated, he mused on the air: 'Have you ever noticed how all composite pictures of wanted criminals resemble Jesse Jackson?' " According to FAIR, "[w]hen Carol Moseley-Braun (D-IL) was in the U.S. Senate, the first black woman ever elected to that body, Limbaugh would play the 'Movin' On Up' theme song from TV's 'Jeffersons' when he mentioned her. Limbaugh sometimes still uses mock dialect -- substituting 'ax' for 'ask'-- when discussing black leaders." FAIR also reported that "[i]n 1992, on his now-defunct TV show, Limbaugh expressed his ire when Spike Lee urged that black schoolchildren get off from school to see his film Malcolm X: 'Spike, if you're going to do that, let's complete the education experience. You should tell them that they should loot the theater, and then blow it up on their way out.' "

Posted by: Mike on April 17, 2007 at 11:55 AM | PERMALINK

It is interesting to note that there has been very little attention to the "game" context of the Imus remarks, which might shed a little light on what was intended by Imus (as opposed to what how others responded.)
The rather dramatic contrasting styles of the Tennessee and Rutgers women's teams were striking--with the Tennessee women playing the more "traditional" women's game and the Rutgers women playing a far more assertive, agressive, almost ferociously competitive style not normally associated with women's basketball. The Rutgers style is reflective, I am sure, of their coach, Vivian Stringer.
I suspect that anyone who saw the Rutgers team play over the last half of the season was amazed to see the dramatic contrast between the Rutgers women on the court and the Rutgers women at the press conference.
And, by the way, Imus has referred to his environmental activist wife as a "green ho"--and I don't think he was slurring her, but was in a sense describing her-- because I think he meant it in the sense of a "tough woman."
There is no excuse for Imus making comments about intercollegiate athletes in his monologue-- but some like myself interpreted his comments far differently having seen the championship game. It could be interpreted as: unashamedly African-American (nappy-headed), tough women (hos)--- not just tough, but real tough (the tattoos part). Not really a compliment, but more of a description. Still, no excuse for making the statement.
Just to put a little brake on all the piling on.
I happen to believe that over the years Imus has probably done far more good than any of the individuals who have contributed to any of the various blog postings on him-- even though he has done more than his share of injury as well.

Posted by: PaulD on April 17, 2007 at 11:56 AM | PERMALINK
noel, help is available. Now, how many of my posts must I reprint here which do not mention Democrats, before you will understand the depth of your psychosis?

You could have a million posts not mentioning Democrats and noel's accusation could still be true, so the only thing even suggesting the relevance of such posts does is show the depth of your inability or unwillingness to think logically. Whether that is a psychiatric defect or simply a character defect is, of course, less clear.

Even if your latest assertion were true, which it isn't, to say that a person is reflexively anti-x is not the same thing as saying the person is reflexively pro-y.

When the two are in practice, even if not in ideal theory, binary alternatives, it certainly does. Now, whether the "pro-y"-ness is deliberate or merely the result of inadequate consideration of the pragmatic realities is, of course, open to debate.

Posted by: cmdicely on April 17, 2007 at 12:02 PM | PERMALINK

noel, you apparently now cannot fathom the meaning of the word "constantly". I'm quite serious; what is your reading comprehension level? Do you just post random words in the hope that one or two of them might have some vague correlation with reality? If so, it might explain how you cannot fathom that asserting that a person's allegedly reflexive support for racists renders them without credibility, on matters of race-baiting, is indeed a personal attack. Yes, from that point on I used an insulting tone towards you, since you indicated that it was your tone of choice. I'm happy to accede to your wishes.

Beyond the invective, however, it really is true that you cannot accurately determine the meanings of very common words, or engage in the most basic of logical calculation. Also, you can't even summarize accurately the content of a very simple conversation, to say nothing of the fact that you lack the ability to accurately interpret a timeline. Here's a hint; Yankel Rosenbaum was murdered in 1991, and the people in Freddies were murdered in 1995. That isn't decades ago. You need help.

Gosh, you would think that just by chance you might be able to write a few sentences that weren't riddled with inaccuracy, misinterpretation of words that the normal 10 year old can understand, or logical fallacies that would embarass the same 10 year old. That thought would be wrong, however, judging by this thread. Look, I'd like to carry on, but until you demonstrate that you have at least a vague grasp of the english language, can tell time, and are up to a rudimentary grasp of logic, I'm afraid I'll decline any further interaction.

Posted by: Will Allen on April 17, 2007 at 12:07 PM | PERMALINK
Preserve your essence, Norman. Will Allen at 11:40 AM
I strongly doubt that any one would seek that 'essence'.
Imus has probably done far more good ... PaulD at 11:56 AM
As I previously pointed out, the Imus charity has seems to be more a a tax shelter.

...The paper, quoting the filings of Imus' charity, reports that it spent $2.6 million in 2003 and $2.7 million in 2002 to bring 100 children to the ranch each year. That works out to just under $3,000 per night per child, which the paper reports is far more than spent by other charities.
It said that Camp Starfish, another well-known charity for children, hosts over 150 kids a summer on a budget of $360,000 a year, while actor Paul Newman's charity, The Hole in the Wall Gang Fund, has a budget that's more than twice as large as the Imus Ranch but hosts 10 times as many kids at its summer camp. ...

Posted by: Mike on April 17, 2007 at 12:11 PM | PERMALINK

cmdicely, since you have previously stated that the actual meanings of the words written take a back seat to the creations of your imagination, which you refer to as "inferences", it is pointless to respond to you. What is the point of engaging a person who openly states that the meanings of words are of secondary importance?

Posted by: Will Allen on April 17, 2007 at 12:14 PM | PERMALINK

There are ample examples of racism by Rush Limbaugh

No there aren't. Making fun of racial stereotypes and mocking the press for being excessively PC (Donovan McNabb) does not make one a racist. And what's wrong with calling Rosie O'Donnell a fat witch? It's not very nice but neither is Rosie. She could afford to miss a meal.

The most interesting aspect of the Imus affair was the re-appearance of the race baiting twins Jackson and Sharpton. I'm afraid if liberals were aiming for the moral highground they missed that boat. No chance with either of these two sleeze merchants

Posted by: rdw on April 17, 2007 at 12:22 PM | PERMALINK

Mike;
Imus' "good" deeds focus on far more than on the Imus charity/ranch, etc.
There are veterans-related, SIDS-related, etc.
I wonder, though, how many of the blog contributors would spend their summers acting as surrogate parents for children who have survived the experience of cancer-- in 9 day stints. Given that Imus himself doesn't physically take well to the high altitudes at the NM ranch, I think there is something of a "sacrifice."

Posted by: PaulD on April 17, 2007 at 12:25 PM | PERMALINK

rdw wrote: "Rush is far from a racist ..."

Rush Limbaugh is a vicious bigot, just like you.

Posted by: SecularAnimist on April 17, 2007 at 12:25 PM | PERMALINK

Rush Limbaugh is a vicious bigot

He's actually a teddy bear of a man and he's certainly not a bigot. He treats all liberals with the same level of contempt no matter their race, sex, color or creed. He is quite funny when discussing females leaving it clear his 3 failed marriages have left him a tad cynical regarding the opposite sex however he is not sexist. Conversely he treats all conservatives with respect. Kidding with them in the same manner.

In fact he will explain it as his secret. He succeeds and conservative talk radio is so powerful because they use humor so well. Rush is funny. He's a happy, optimistic guy as are most conservtives. Al Franken and liberal talk radio is a bust because you are so dreary with the constant woe is me the sky is falling nonsense. You feed your Al Gore / GW crap to kids and they become depressed. Why would anyone willingly expose themselves to a steady diet of that?

You can only be influencial of you have listeners. Rush has many more than anyone else.

Posted by: rdw on April 17, 2007 at 1:13 PM | PERMALINK

So much of our public morality, or at least it's [sic] realization in institutional behavior, is largely situationally driven.

That's one of the few times I've agreed with Will Allen/Alen. I suspect that he and I have markedly different takes on the problems resulting from the phenomenon he describes, though.

Man, I read Drum's posts along these lines and I wonder if he's getting out from behind those rose-colored miniblinds often enough. His world view seems increasingly limited to general ennui plus scorn toward those who can whip up interest in more than a handful of topics--including everyone who recognizes the tangible cultural and societal impact of otherwise uninteresting sources. Is this Crotchety Old Man Syndrome arriving 20-30 years early?

Posted by: shortstop on April 17, 2007 at 1:16 PM | PERMALINK

As I previously pointed out, the Imus charity has seems to be more a a tax shelter.

There's much to criticize Imus for this isn't one of them. If he wanted a tax shelter he could do much better. This is not a very cost effective charity in terms of cost per child but he had a specific goal for a specific target group many of whom won't see many more birthdays.

His thing is horses, ranches and the beauty of the great outdoors and he's decided he's going to give kids a week like they've never had and never will have. It's not a good deed it's a great deed and he spends a lot of his own money and does his own fundraiding for the rest.

What do you do?

Posted by: rdw on April 17, 2007 at 1:20 PM | PERMALINK
....His thing ... the beauty of the great outdoors....rightist dim wit at 1:20 PM
Surrre, that's why he lives in a NYC condo and has a home in Connecticut. That's why he deducts $3000 per night per child. Keep drinking the kool-aid Limbaugh-boy.
He's actually a teddy bear of a man...rightist dim wit at 1:13 PM
Teddy bears take sex-vacations to the Dominican Republic and dope out on OxyContin ? Who knew? Posted by: Mike on April 17, 2007 at 1:31 PM | PERMALINK

'A teddy bear of a man'

rdw's officially off his rocker.

Posted by: MsNThrope on April 17, 2007 at 1:35 PM | PERMALINK

Rush Limbaugh is a vicious bigot and a deliberate liar. His radio program consists of a steady stream of hate speech and lies. He is well paid by the right-wing extremist media machine to bamboozle weak-minded, ignorant mental slaves like rdw with bullshit.

Dick Cheney goes on Rush Limbaugh's program because he knows that there he can spew his sickening lies to an audience consisting entirely of the neo-brownshirt, mentally degenerate dittohead lunatic fringe and he won't be challenged by the bought-and-paid-for liar and hate-monger, Rush Limbaugh.

Of course rdw doesn't see what the problem is. Like all so-called "conservatives" whose politics have no actual content other than hatred of "liberals" (much like the politics of Nazi brownshirts in 1930s Germany had no content other than hatred of "Jews"), and who worship gangsters, mass murderers and thieves like Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush, vicious bigoted hatred is all in good fun for rdw. He genuinely doesn't understand why anyone should be upset about it.


Posted by: SecularAnimist on April 17, 2007 at 1:40 PM | PERMALINK
... how many of the blog contributors would spend their summers .... PaulD at 12:25 PM
This post and thread are not about blog contributors who, by and large, are not multi-millionaires seeking tax shelters. Check the pull quote above: Paul Newman, twice the expenditure, 10 times the kids.
It could be BDS as named by Charles Krautenhammer... rightist dim wit at 1:33 PM
Bush Derangement Syndrome is characterized by overwhelming sycophancy to an incompetent, inarticulate leader who institutes policies inimical to his country's interest and welfare. Those suffering BDS, as it is commonly called, are able to make a statement defending their leader on moment, and argue the exact opposite the next. Indeed, most of those afflicted with this bizarre disease are incapable of cognitive functions when involves their Dear Leader.

MsNThrope, certainly off his meds.

Posted by: Mike on April 17, 2007 at 1:41 PM | PERMALINK

Better check your fingers again. Assuming you are referring to presidential elections + midterms, I believe the proper answer is the sum of 1 + 1 + 1. And that first 1 is kind of shaky as well.

Posted by: demisod on April 17, 2007 at 1:43 PM | PERMALINK

Surrre, that's why he lives in a NYC condo and has a home in Connecticut

And has a large ranch in New Mexico. He lives in NYC part of the year because that's where he makes his $10M a year

Posted by: rdw on April 17, 2007 at 1:49 PM | PERMALINK

Teddy bears take sex-vacations to the Dominican Republic and dope out on OxyContin ?

When they're worth more than $100M they do anything they want.

Posted by: rdw on April 17, 2007 at 1:50 PM | PERMALINK

MsNThrope wrote: "rdw's officially off his rocker."

rdw is delusional. In my opinion -- and I am not a mental health professional -- rdw suffers from senile dementia and bipolar disorder. The dementia accounts for his incoherence, his inability to stay on any one subject for more than a couple of sentences, and his almost mechanical repetition of certain delusional fixed ideas. The bipolar disorder accounts for his verbal diarrhea -- when he is in a "manic" phase he logs on and spews out excessively verbose commentary, obviously typed up as fast as he can go.

These two afflictions, combined with the toxic ignorance that results from his obsession with right-wing extremist media (the entire purpose of which is to deceive its audience with a carefully crafted, focus-group tested tapestry of lies), accounts for rdw's complete disconnect from reality. He lives in the fictional world invented by the right-wing extremist media, which has virtually no resemblance to the real world. Study after study has confirmed that people whose primary source of information is the right-wing extremist propaganda machine (e.g. Fox News and Rush Limbaugh) are the most ignorant people in America, and rdw is an example of this.

None of this excuses the fact that rdw is also a vicious little bigot who, just to take one example, gleefully revels in the suffering and misery of the Palestinians living under US-Israeli military occupation, and who, for another example, has repeatedly called for the US to use nuclear weapons to destroy major cities in the Arab countries of the Middle East and incinerate millions of innocent civilians "if that's what it takes".

Posted by: SecularAnimist on April 17, 2007 at 1:53 PM | PERMALINK

Better check your fingers again

GWB won 4 consecutative elections. Two as Governor of Texas and Two as President.

Posted by: rdw on April 17, 2007 at 1:53 PM | PERMALINK

He lives in NYC part of the year because that's where he makes his $10M a year.

Makes = made. Oops! That's more time to spend with the horses!

When they're worth more than $100M they do anything they want.

...until they get arrested for the dope and publicly ridiculed for having to buy sex. And that's assuming the Dominicans were of age; most in that industry in the DR aren't.

Poor old rdw. With BDS affecting 70 percent of the population, "rangement" is getting awfully lonely.

Some mental-health professionals studying these threads could have a field day. A paper comparing the self-delusions of rdw and Will Al(l)en, explaining the two very distinctive and easily identified pathologies in each, would be fun.

Posted by: shortstop on April 17, 2007 at 1:59 PM | PERMALINK

Ah, I see SecularAnimist and I were thinking along the same lines. rdw does not have dementia in my view; that's not how it works. He's got some other pretty obvious stuff going on, though.

Posted by: shortstop on April 17, 2007 at 2:01 PM | PERMALINK
When they're worth more than $100M they do anything they want.rightist dim wit at 1:50 PM
That is a morally reprehensible attitude to take. You evidently share Rush's moral turpitude, in addition to the well-stated list above. Posted by: Mike on April 17, 2007 at 2:03 PM | PERMALINK

He genuinely doesn't understand why anyone should be upset about it.

Wrong. I do understand why Rush and GWB are hated. They're winners and that makes you losers. In your heart of hearts you know for certain you are soooooo much smarter and wiser than the two of them yet they continually eat your lunch.

That's got to be intensly frustrating. You keep on getting beat by chimpy. That's got to suck. How do you get up in the morning?

You morons and your counsins in Europe will do what you always do and use the Virginia shooting tradegy as an opportunity to urge gun control but will do so in tour typically condescending manner ensuring your own failure. But it's actually even worse than that. Your cousins in Europe will be especially snide. And who can blame them? When European culture is so obviously superior to American culture (only because of conservatives) how can they not be a little bit snooty?

Problems is Americans hate snooty. Nothing is worse than condescending Europeans and the beauty of the web is we get to see all of their headlines. The MSM will never show them but we see them anyway. We also get to hear their comments. Thinks thay are so true and play so well in Brussels don't play at all well in Virginia or Ohio or PA.

Rush and the rest of talk radio and the blogs and Fox will ensure that over 50M Americans hear themselves getting trashed by Europeans. There is a reason why US public opinion of the UN, the EU, France and Europeans are all at all time lows. It's not an accident. It's definitely not a phase. This is how it is and it will get worse. Consevatives hold the Europeans are not our friends. And we've got plenty of evidence.

Posted by: rdw on April 17, 2007 at 2:07 PM | PERMALINK

"rangement" is getting awfully lonely.

Being correct is never lonely. I'm no Bill Clinton. I don't need to be liked or popular.

Posted by: rdw on April 17, 2007 at 2:09 PM | PERMALINK

When they're worth more than $100M they do anything they want.rightist dim wit at 1:50 PM

This sets a new low even for someone as morally bankrupt as Wooten clearly is. It's absolutely staggering.


IMPUNITY, n. Wealth. - Ambrose Bierce (1842 - 1914), The Devil's Dictionary

Posted by: MsNThrope on April 17, 2007 at 2:10 PM | PERMALINK

until they get arrested for the dope and publicly ridiculed for having to buy sex

Rush likes the attention. Your ridicule is good publicity. He's no Bill Clinton either.

As far as the buying sex I did not see that report. Are you on the Duke faculty? Or do you actually have a shred of evidence?

I can imagine why he had viagra but I don't know what happened. Neither do any of you gutterballs.

Posted by: rdw on April 17, 2007 at 2:15 PM | PERMALINK

If I was worth $100 million, I would crush each and every one of you by finding out who holds your mortgage; then, I would call in that mortgage and squeeze you like a lemon.

Or perhaps not. In either case, if I was worth that much, I would not be yammering at liberals so much. I'd probably be boating or skiing somewhere. Preferably where there is no Internet.

Posted by: Norman Rogers on April 17, 2007 at 2:21 PM | PERMALINK

I can imagine why he had viagra but I don't know what happened. Neither do any of you gutterballs.

It is used to give a man an erection, sir.

As embarrassed as I am to have to explain this to you, when a man and a woman take off their clothes and decide to hug each other forcefully, a certain amount of friction is produced. Liquids fly everywhere. This cannot happen if the man is trying to shoot pool with a rope.

Posted by: Norman Rogers on April 17, 2007 at 2:24 PM | PERMALINK

gleefully revels in the suffering and misery of the Palestinians living under US-Israeli military occupation

Not at all true. I revel in the wisdom of Ariel Sharon and GWB in using the fence to bring peace and prosperity to Israel.

It's awful what's happening to the Palestinians on the wrong side of the fence and utterly senseless why they so embraced terrorism. They effectively demanded a fence knowing they and the butchers who lead them would be stuck on one side with each other. They had to know it would only result in more arab on arab killing. Butchers kill.

I revel in the fact liberalism has suffered yet another major blow and has so little global influence. Liberals dominate the UN and EU but both institutions are powerless and ineffective. Moreove GWBs Presidencies have been a total disaster for each.

You had to respect his brilliant stategery in negotiating with Poland and the Czech Republic for Missle Defense sites. How shrewd to get sites within the EU without the EU or France or Germany even knowing about it and having zero influence?

Virtually everything GWB has done geo-politically has been outside the UN and EU. At the same time with help from Rush, Fox and others puclic support for the UN, EU, NATO etc, is at all time lows. Europe declared war on Conservatives and has been bleeding ever since. And you don't think Rush is influencial.

Posted by: rdw on April 17, 2007 at 2:26 PM | PERMALINK
... 50M Americans hear themselves getting trashed by Europeans.c ... rightist dim wit at 2:07 PM
Show us the evidence, and show why it is not the result of George W. Bush and his insane policies. The US was well respected when Bill Clinton was president. It has the world's sympathy after 9-11. Bush's lies and policies squandered it all and his pathetic little defenders like you are too intellectually impoverished and too much his lickspittle to see the damage he has done. That is what happens when you let racists rule your reason or your obvious lack thereof. Posted by: Mike on April 17, 2007 at 2:26 PM | PERMALINK

This cannot happen if the man is trying to shoot pool with a rope.

Don't be embarrased. I rather enjoyed the cheap shot jokes on Rush as did he. His own were very good. I enjoy more bile expressed by those who think he lacks influence.

He sure gets their blood pressure up doesn't he?

Posted by: rdw on April 17, 2007 at 2:30 PM | PERMALINK
...Virtually everything GWB has done geo-politically... rightist dim wit at 2:26 PM
Actually, every thing Dubya has done has been wrong, stupid, arrogant, and counterproductive to American national interests. Now, take your lithium and get back on topic. Posted by: Mike on April 17, 2007 at 2:31 PM | PERMALINK

rdw's descent into gibbering incoherence on this thread speaks for itself.

Whatever the proper clinical diagnosis might be -- and as I noted above, I am not a mental health professional -- rdw clearly exemplifies the descent from weak-minded, ignorant dittohead-ism into full-blown mental pathology that has overtaken the Limbaugh-addled lunatic fringe who call themselves "conservatives" in America today.

The appropriate response, I believe, is pity, although I admit it is difficult to feel pity for someone who repeatedly expresses the hateful, vicious bigotry and ignorant, thuggish arrogance that pervades all of rdw's writing.

Posted by: SecularAnimist on April 17, 2007 at 2:56 PM | PERMALINK

Actually, every thing Dubya has done has been wrong

Look at Israel. Clinton left an infatada. That's a fact. The middle east was a mess and the jews were getting butchered. Today Israel is prosperous and safe with a secure fence.

Over time the fence will be made even stronger and Israel safer. With each passing year Israel becomes economically and technically stronger and thus safer. Palestine now has a choice to abandon terrorism and live as a civil society or continue their civil war. There's a great deal more clarity. They can continue killing each other, or not.

That's far better than terrorist walking on a school bus blowing up little girls because they're jewish.

Posted by: rdw on April 17, 2007 at 3:35 PM | PERMALINK

who repeatedly expresses the hateful, vicious bigotry

I am not hateful. I am quite happy with a very good sense of humor. Life has been good to me. I live and raise my kids in the best country in the history of civilization and I even get to live in a very attractive section of this great country.

I will soon leave to go watch my 16-yr old daughter play lacrosse at a facility I couldn't even dream of when I was her age growing up in Philadephia. The public school is situated on 100 acres and the all weather turf field in a 2,000 seat stadium with electronic score board ad speaker system is as good or better than any college had in 1972. The 8 lane all-weather track is the equivalent, at least, of the track at the famous Franklin field at the U of PA, site of the world famous Penn Relays.

There is no bigotry in me nor my writings. The anger you have is the result of your own failures. I am happy about the fence because it has been so successful. Jews can go into malls and stores again. That is how is should be. I do not celebrate Palestinain killing Palestinian but can accept that because they willingly embraced terrorism they should be the ones to suffer by it as a lesson for the world.

Posted by: rdw on April 17, 2007 at 3:46 PM | PERMALINK

[Got any new material?]

Posted by: rdw on April 17, 2007 at 4:02 PM | PERMALINK

Respect means nothing. But it does when Clinton isn't respected. Then respect is important. But everyone in this country except me hating Bush, that's not important. George (Bush, not Clooney) and I don't care about being respected. Because we're right. That's all we need. But you, you and 70 percent of Americans plus the whole world, you're wrong. And I don't respect you. So respect is important. Bush was elected and that's all that's important. It doesn't matter that his power is gone and his White House and department people are going up in flames. That's not important. Only the election of 2004 was important. Respect it. But not the 2006 election. That's not important. I have no respect for it and it doesn't matter anyway, because respect means nothing.

Posted by: The funhouse that is rdw's mind on April 17, 2007 at 4:09 PM | PERMALINK

[You as well. Any new material? You two have shouted the same insults at one another for years. Who is the most annoying? A true toss-up.]

Posted by: SecularAnimist on April 17, 2007 at 5:43 PM | PERMALINK

SecularAnimistRush Limbaugh is a vicious bigot and a deliberate liar. His radio program consists of a steady stream of hate speech and lies. He is well paid by the right-wing extremist media machine to bamboozle weak-minded, ignorant mental slaves like rdw with bullshit.

Quite a number of mistakes:

1. Rush Limbaugh chose a black man to officiate at his marriage a few years ago (Clarence Thomas). His sidekick for many years was a black man "Mr. Snerdly". He didn't make a fuss about these choices; he just did it.

2. His radio show is popular, not because of hate speech, but because it's so upbeat.

3. He is indeed well paid, but not by the right wing machine. His sponsors pay him a fortune because he has so many listeners.

4. Survey shows his listeners not ignorant and weak-minded. Instead, they are more educated than the average American and much more politically knowledgable.

Posted by: ex-liberal on April 17, 2007 at 6:10 PM | PERMALINK

In 1985, Tipper Gores co-founded the Parents Music Resource Center (PMRC) with Susan Baker, wife of then United States Secretary of the Treasury James Baker.

Critics of the PMRC, including Jello Biafra, Dave Mustaine, and Frank Zappa, have accused the PMRC of conducting public and under-the-table censorship campaigns against various recording artists and have pointed out the PMRC's ties to the American religious right.

Posted by: Brojo on April 17, 2007 at 6:57 PM | PERMALINK

In his book The Ice Opinion, the rapper Ice-T wrote [page 98], "Tipper Gore is the only woman I ever directly called a bitch on any of my records, and I meant that in the most negative sense of the word". On the song "Freedom of Speech", Ice-T had also written lyrics that implied that she did not understand the nature of sex.

Posted by: Brojo on April 17, 2007 at 7:08 PM | PERMALINK
I don't hate...rightist dim wit at 6:43 PM
All you do is spew hate. You must be a great shame and embarrassment to your family if they have to endure the same crazy rants you spout off here. The shame, your shame, is George W. Bush and his allies, their lies, their war mongering, their fear mongering and their policies of hate division and partisanship to the determent of American interests. No wonder the Europeans disdain America: you are the quintessential Ugly American. Posted by: Mike on April 17, 2007 at 7:09 PM | PERMALINK
Quite a number of mistakes.... ex-lax at 6:10 PM
Choosing a self-loathing black is not showing a lack of racism, but the lengths rightists go to perpetuate their ideology. There is nothing 'upbeat' about his show: It consists of lies, propaganda, and hate. His listenership is overstated. They count each day as a separate audience, when, in fact, the same idiots listen daily. Surveys of political knowledge show rightist are the least informed despite their education. See Selling ignorance . Posted by: Mike on April 17, 2007 at 7:17 PM | PERMALINK
...We know Rush drives you up a wall...rightist dim wit at 7:09 PM
There is nothing honest or particularly intelligent about your media god. Your stats show you are all actually dittos, unwilling or unable to think for yourselves; and, no Rush does not drive me anywhere: he's too silly and ill-informed. If he were to comment here, I would respond, but I never bother to listen to his crap. What you prove is that you don't care about facts or policy. What is important is your resentment of people who don't kowtow to your ideology. Hating liberals is more important than making sense: Party over country and simple hatred of 'liberals' is your primary motivation. Posted by: Mike on April 17, 2007 at 7:20 PM | PERMALINK

attribution

absolution

anapostle

Posted by: Brojo on April 17, 2007 at 10:54 PM | PERMALINK
....We're done with them.rightist dim wit at 9:13 PM
Only in your wet dreams. Not only is the Euro at highs against the falling dollar, you need their markets and their exports.
....of the last 28 years... rightist dim wit at 9:29 PM
Such is the power of propaganda, voter suppression, and lying about the party positions when you have the corporate media as outlets for your party line. You are still unable to stay on topic. What is your mental disorder? Can't you defend the sex vacations of your idol Rush? Does it bother you that he is buying children to slake his lusts? Posted by: Mike on April 18, 2007 at 10:06 AM | PERMALINK

SecularAnimist, I get it that you don't like Rush Limbaugh, but there is factual data out there. Some time ago, Pew Research (which is not a conservative organization) reported that Rush's listeners are more politically informed and better educated than average:

Judged by their answers to three news knowledge questions2, the most informed audiences belong to the political magazines, Rush Limbaugh's radio show, the O'Reilly Factor, news magazines, and online news sources. Close behind are the regular audiences for NPR and the Daily Show.

Audiences with the highest educational achievement, by far, are the literary magazines and online news outlets. Readers of news magazines, political magazines and business magazines, listeners of Rush Limbaugh and NPR, and viewers of the Daily Show, and C-SPAN also are much more likely than the average person to have a college degree.

Got that: Rush's listeners are even better informed than NPR viewers.

Incidentlly, you call Justice Thomas a "token" (with no evidence) but you didn't address Rush's relationship with "Mr. Snerdly." Note that Rush didn't use "Mr. Snerdly" as a token, because he didn't seek to publicize the race of of his long-time call screener.

Posted by: ex-liberal on April 18, 2007 at 12:47 PM | PERMALINK




 

 

Read Jonathan Rowe remembrance and articles
Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

Advertise in WM



buy from Amazon and
support the Monthly