Adios Imus

I've never heard more than a few bits and pieces of Don Imus. Nothing I heard made me want to listen any further. I think the furor over his recent comments which now seem to have ended his radio career says more about the rest of us than it does about Imus.

First of all, who did Imus insult? He did not, as far as I've read, say that all black females are nappy-headed hos. He was referring specifically to the Rutgers ladies basketball team. What he said was ignorant and ugly and he owes those young ladies an apology.

If, however, you are not a member of the Rutgers ladies basketball team, you have no business demanding an apology, because you have not been insulted. Who made Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton the official conscience of black America? Was it black Americans, or was it the media which needs a handy face to put on stories about race?

Second, Imus seems to have a long pattern of saying outrageous things like this. Yet he has not lacked for a wide variety of famous, and generally liberal, people willing to make guest appearances on his show. Why are they all suddenly so outraged with him? This could not be a surprise to his regular audience and guests. This suggests to me their current disgust has more to do with media attention than any principles of propriety.

Third, the cancellation of Imus by MSNBC and CBS Radio was driven totally by money. Advertisers were starting to bail out. No advertisers, no show. It's not at all complicated. I don't believe for a second the faux sensitivity of the network executives. They are protecting their business. Nothing more, nothing less.

I will leave you with a quote from Bill Donohue of the Catholic League, placing this story in the context of other recent events.

“Two years ago, Penn Jillette (of the comedy team Penn and Teller) went on Showtime calling Mother Teresa ‘Mother F—king Teresa’ and called the nuns who worked with her ‘f—king c—ts.’ Showtime is owned by Viacom and that is why I wrote to its chief, Sumner Redstone, to register a complaint. He wrote back extolling the merits of ‘artistic freedom’ and ‘tolerance.’ Last year, on Viacom-owned CBS radio, Jillette said Mother Teresa ‘had this weird kink that I think was sexual,’ compared the saintly nun to Charles Manson and said she ‘got her [sexual] kicks watching people suffer and die.’ Again, nothing was done about this.

“In 2005, Bill Maher went on HBO at the time of the death of Pope John Paul II and said, ‘For those who could not make the funeral, the Vatican has asked that in lieu of flowers, just stop touching your d—k.’ He also said that the whole story of Jesus, the Virgin Mary and the Resurrection was ‘grafted from paganism’; he ended by mocking the death of the pope and the upcoming conclave. The letter I received from HBO said that ‘it’s a free country, and people are free to say silly things—even on HBO.’

“Right before Easter, the Catholic League protested the chocolate Jesus with his genitals exposed that was to be shown in the art gallery of the Roger Smith Hotel in midtown Manhattan (located on street level, the public was invited to eat him). Air America radio co-host Cenk Uygur, writing on ‘The Huffington Post,’ said, ‘So is the argument that Jesus didn’t have a d—k? Or were people offended because it was too big? Too Small? Too immaculate? Not immaculate enough?’ Regarding Imus’s remark, Uygur called it ‘derogatory and insulting.’

“Similarly, Joan Walsh on said the chocolate Jesus was not ‘a big deal,’ and advised people not to go see it if they didn’t like it. She has now called on Imus to be fired. Even New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg said ‘don’t pay any attention’ to the chocolate Jesus, but he now finds it necessary to brand Imus’ comments ‘repugnant.’

“In other words, Catholic bashing is humorous and an exercise in liberty. Racism is awful. Bigotry, then, is neither good nor bad—it just depends who the target is.”


Anonymous said...

Well, Mother Fucking Theresa IS an evil person who people should know about. It's AMAZING that anyone still thinks she did any good.

Patrick said...

I think many people would disagree. Please elaborate on why you think this.

Anonymous said...

She put people in Homes of The Dying, but did not help them, they lived in squalor. She did not use money collected to help them, but claimed their suffering made god happy. But she took herself to Mayo clinic when necessary. (this is a brief summary). She used dirty needles, withheld drugs, put the dying in all in the name of god.

Do a google search and read yourself. Or read Hitchen's books,

or check out this link:

or this one:

Patrick said...

I don't think anyone believes Mother Teresa was totally perfect, totally consistent, and made no mistakes.

That is far different from what you seem to be saying, which is that she never "did any good." I think the poor people of Calcutta would probably disagree. And I'm 100% sure she did more to help those people than you or I did.

Thanks for your comments.

Anonymous said...

What do you think she did good for the people of Calcutta? I open to it, I just haven't seen any evidence whatsoever.

I gave $150K to charity last year, and all with no evil religion involved. Is that more or less than you? Doesn't really matter. If you're doing good, the amount is irrelevant.

Patrick said...

Interesting term you use, "evil religion." Since the existence of "evil" is itself a religious concept, it sounds like you must be a religious person yourself. I can respond more effectively if I know the source of your beliefs. Please tell us more.

Anonymous said...

You're right...I say "evil" poetically...I just mean that religion in any form, any belief in any imaginary friend perpetuates such terrible things that anything in the name of religion, even "good xtians" is abhorrent.

The source of my beliefs is merely science. I believe in things that are real.

Anonymous said...

The dialoge here is entertaining, to say the least. Patrick, nice find regarding those instances where HBO and other programs disparaged certain individuals. And not a stink was raised in the "media." Yes, I agree, it's all about economics. I wonder if a company such as P&G (supposedly one of the most conservative corporations in the US) advertises on other Time Warner owned entities. Thanks for sharing your thoughts, and especially for engaging individuals such as the poster here.

Anonymous said...

That's the beauty of free speech and free enterprise. People can say whatever they want (and should) and you can change the channel, scream about it, say what you want back. It's got to be that way to live in a free country.

Patrick said...

With freedom comes responsibility. Whatever you think about Don Imus, he did at least say what he did in public under his own name. He paid a price for it.

I can respect Imus a lot more than people who, for example, leave provocative but anonymous comments on blogs. If you really believe what you are saying, stand up and take responsibility for it.

Anonymous said...

We couldn't agree more. Imus said what he wanted and paid the consequences. It would have been better if it were truly the choice of the network to fire him, and not the fear of the FCC, which is an unconstitutional organization.

My comments are not intended to be provocative, they are merely a voice of reason. Everything I say is backed up by facts, or is qualified with an indicator of my opinion. I choose not to use my blogger name because I will leave my comments on other people's blogs but not interested in being inundated on mine. Freedom of choice. Nothing to do with "standing up" - everything to do with preservation of time.

Thanks for keeping up.