Crossing the Racial Line: Imus Has No Defense

As corporate sponsors race to drop MSNBC’s “Imus in the Morning” show (in fact MSNBC just announced it has dropped the show as well) after host Don Imus’ offensive comments, it should be clear that mean-spirited ridicule is not an equal-opportunity sport.

.

Even after apologizing to the predominantly African-American women on Rutgers’ basketball team who he’d called “nappy-headed ho’s,” Imus defended himself with an old argument, that by offending people of every race and creed, he cannot be called a bigot: “This program has been, for 30 or 35 years, a program that makes fun of everybody.” 

.

Indeed, Imus has taken pride in getting away with crude and boorish put-downs. Looking back fondly on a particularly nasty rant against Hillary Clinton last May, he recently declared: “I never admitted it when I went down there and got in all that big jam, insulting Bill Clinton and his fat ugly wife, Satan. Did I? Did I ever say I was sorry for that?”

.

Being an equal-opportunity jerk is no defense. It may not be fair, but abusive comments against certain groups can end your career, simple as that, while jabs at other groups don't raise such a stir. Rule of thumb is that the more oppression a group historically has endured, the more off-limits it is. (Maybe that’s not so unfair after all.) 

.

Best advice is to avoid vicious, hateful rhetoric altogether – even if you make your living as a jokester. Just ask Michael “Kramer” Richards.

- Jon Harmon

Comments

[john]

jon,

while imus is an idiot that i wouldn't consider listening to before, i do think that he was sacrificed to this weird little list of untouchables: Black, gay, and Jewish.

(Hear the howls?)

Why is it that these three groups cannot be spoken against? Look no further than the media to see the pandering. Please don't get me wrong, I don't want to see hate anywhere, however, I'm fed up seeing someone with a differing point of view (from this trio) get screwed whenever he opens his mouth.

Whoopi Goldberg recently listed examples of why Imus should be fired: Jimmy the Greek, Al Campanis, Rush Limbaugh, and a couple of others. Her point was that since they were fired than Imus should also.

She never mentioned Isaiah Thomas (racial comments about Larry Bird) or Jesse Jackson, or Tawana Brawley. None of these people were fired, or even disciplined.

I recently listened to the dedication of Daniel Pearl's place on the Holocaust Memorial. (Forget the ridiculousness of the honor for a moment) The speaker gave the same boilerplate about "never again." But what does this mean?

"Never again" applies only to the Jewish people, and so is less a statement of justice and love as one of nationalist determination. If not, then where were the Israeli troops (And legions of Jewish volunteers) in Rawanda, Cambodia, and Darfur?

Everyone can agree that what Imus said was wrong. That's not the problem. The problem is that no one can DISAGREE without fear of losing a job or something worse.

If the rule of thumb is "that the more oppression a group historically has endured, the more off-limits it is" than we must be prepared to endure longer periods of warped reconciliation and growth.

(And since when did "thumbs" become such experts on rules anyway!:)

john