Its not about Imus

1235

Comments

  • farfromglorified
    farfromglorified Posts: 5,700
    Abuskedti wrote:
    Its is not just one person's opinion when they are broadcasting into everyones house. For that privlege (which earns them millions) there must be accountability.

    Why do you keep saying "accountability" as the person is question is trashed publicly, apologizes, is suspended, and is losing advertisers? I mean, where does this "accountability" you keep mentioning begin?
  • puremagic
    puremagic Posts: 1,907
    farfromglorified wrote:
    You tell me. I'm going to fine you $500 for this post. What's wrong with that?



    You tell me. I'm going to shut you up for two hours each day. What's wrong with that?


    You are willing to punish me. Why isn't your conviction that strong for these media people? Maybe I would not have thought of these examples if the door hadn't be open by them. So what is wrong with fines and tapping into airtime for repeated offenses?
    SIN EATERS--We take the moral excrement we find in this equation and we bury it down deep inside of us so that the rest of our case can stay pure. That is the job. We are morally indefensible and absolutely necessary.
  • mammasan
    mammasan Posts: 5,656
    puremagic wrote:
    You are willing to punish me. Why isn't your conviction that strong for these media people? Maybe I would not have thought of these examples if the door hadn't be open by them. So what is wrong with fines and tapping into airtime for repeated offenses?

    Because it is an infringement on Freedom of Speech. I don't agree with what Imus said but that last thing we need is more FCC regulations and their morality quad patroling the air waves.
    "When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
  • hippiemom
    hippiemom Posts: 3,326
    mammasan wrote:
    Because it is an infringement on Freedom of Speech. I don't agree with what Imus said but that last thing we need is more FCC regulations and their morality quad patroling the air waves.
    Exactly. If his employer wants to punish him and take him off the air, fine. If his listeners want to punish him by turning off the radio, fine. If his sponsors want to punish him financially, fine. But for the government to get involved is just as wrong as wrong can be.
    "Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." ~ MLK, 1963
  • fanch75
    fanch75 Posts: 3,734
    What's wrong with you wack ass crackers?
    Do you remember Rock & Roll Radio?
  • puremagic
    puremagic Posts: 1,907
    mammasan wrote:
    Because it is an infringement on Freedom of Speech. I don't agree with what Imus said but that last thing we need is more FCC regulations and their morality quad patroling the air waves.

    How is this an infringement on his freedom of speech? The FCC already patrols the air waves, they just do it selectively. The FCC already has the power to levy fines and restrict air time.
    SIN EATERS--We take the moral excrement we find in this equation and we bury it down deep inside of us so that the rest of our case can stay pure. That is the job. We are morally indefensible and absolutely necessary.
  • RainDog
    RainDog Posts: 1,824
    onelongsong wrote:
    and i also have the right to use deadly force if i'm attacked for using the word. if that is imus's opinion; so be it. he has a right to his opinion and a right to vocalize it.
    my question is:
    why does the opinion of one man upset the entire black community? isn't it the inferior that can't rise above a simple statement? had the statement been ignored; it would have only been heard by his listeners and long forgotten by now. because of the frenzy; it's now a catch phrase that will be around for a long time.
    No, there's a good chance you'd be arrested if you used deadly force - particularly if the attack against you wasn't on par with your deadly response. You'd be charged with manslaughter, sent to trial, and may or may not serve time, depending on the verdict. If it can be proven that you intentionally provoked the attack in order to give yourself an excuse to kill the person, you'd likely be charged with more, and would most definitely serve time.

    I don't know what Imus's opinion is. I'd barely heard of the guy before all this - so the last part of your post could be true. My original reason for posting in this thread was to address the idea that blacks are "allowed" to be racist, but whites aren't. Everyone's allowed to be racist. Just don't expect to be shielded from everyone else when your racism isn't received as jovially as other people's might be. And before anyone screams "Double Standard" remember that context is the most important factor, not skin color.
  • mammasan
    mammasan Posts: 5,656
    puremagic wrote:
    How is this an infringement on his freedom of speech? The FCC already patrols the air waves, they just do it selectively. The FCC already has the power to levy fines and restrict air time.

    Powers that they shouldn't have. I don't think our federal government should have the authority to confine anyone's speech, even hate speech. Like hippimom said, it is fine if his employer wants to fire him, it's fine if his sponsors want to pull their money, and it's fine if his listeners want to change the station. I just don't like it when the federal government get's involved because it is not their place.
    "When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
  • DPrival78
    DPrival78 CT Posts: 2,263
    fanch75 wrote:
    What's wrong with you wack ass crackers?

    you just ruined my year's accomplishments with that remark.

    mods, ban this man for life please.

    no wait, wait.. he's one of us, so it's ok.

    carry on!
    i'm more a fan of popular bands.. like the bee-gees, pearl jam
  • callen
    callen Posts: 6,388
    Drew263 wrote:
    See you're proving my point. Again I ask..what about the white girls on the team?

    You're ASSuming it was a racial statement...ie looking to be offended.

    And don't get me started on the hypocrisy of it in this country.

    and your obviously a white boy....kinda goes with the line...."The haves have not a clue" But for you..the Whites have not a clue. Imus should be fired..he doesn't deserve to have a good job.
    10-18-2000 Houston, 04-06-2003 Houston, 6-25-2003 Toronto, 10-8-2004 Kissimmee, 9-4-2005 Calgary, 12-3-05 Sao Paulo, 7-2-2006 Denver, 7-22-06 Gorge, 7-23-2006 Gorge, 9-13-2006 Bern, 6-22-2008 DC, 6-24-2008 MSG, 6-25-2008 MSG
  • callen
    callen Posts: 6,388
    farfromglorified wrote:
    Why do you keep saying "accountability" as the person is question is trashed publicly, apologizes, is suspended, and is losing advertisers? I mean, where does this "accountability" you keep mentioning begin?

    and needs to be called out...and if his employer still feels they want to employ him fine.
    10-18-2000 Houston, 04-06-2003 Houston, 6-25-2003 Toronto, 10-8-2004 Kissimmee, 9-4-2005 Calgary, 12-3-05 Sao Paulo, 7-2-2006 Denver, 7-22-06 Gorge, 7-23-2006 Gorge, 9-13-2006 Bern, 6-22-2008 DC, 6-24-2008 MSG, 6-25-2008 MSG
  • farfromglorified
    farfromglorified Posts: 5,700
    puremagic wrote:
    You are willing to punish me.

    No, I'm not. I have no interest in punishing you. I'm simply trying to demostrate the problems with randomly fining and censoring people as if there are no consequences.
    Why isn't your conviction that strong for these media people? Maybe I would not have thought of these examples if the door hadn't be open by them. So what is wrong with fines and tapping into airtime for repeated offenses?

    What is wrong is that these aren't offenses. If I throw a rock at you and it hits you, that's an offense. However, if I write "nigger" on a rock, it's up to you to get offended by that or not. Understand?
  • farfromglorified
    farfromglorified Posts: 5,700
    callen wrote:
    and needs to be called out...and if his employer still feels they want to employ him fine.

    Is he not being "called out"???? I'm glad you consider it "fine" that an employer and employee are allowed to actually make choices without your approval.
  • RainDog
    RainDog Posts: 1,824
    And besides, if black Americans weren't allowed to make racial comments about white Americans....
    fanch75 wrote:
    What's wrong with you wack ass crackers?

    where would fanch get all his jokes? ;)
  • Abuskedti
    Abuskedti Posts: 1,917
    farfromglorified wrote:
    No, I'm not. I have no interest in punishing you. I'm simply trying to demostrate the problems with randomly fining and censoring people as if there are no consequences.



    What is wrong is that these aren't offenses. If I throw a rock at you and it hits you, that's an offense. However, if I write "nigger" on a rock, it's up to you to get offended by that or not. Understand?

    And if you yell fire at a movie theater - It is up to the crowd exiting small doors to do so in an orderly fashion. When they get trampled, you can cry "freedom of speech" and "it was a joke"

    Just because the connection is not one that you would make does not mean it is not there.
  • mammasan
    mammasan Posts: 5,656
    Abuskedti wrote:
    And if you yell fire at a movie theater - It is up to the crowd exiting small doors to do so in an orderly fashion. When they get trampled, you can cry "freedom of speech" and "it was a joke"

    Just because the connection is not one that you would make does not mean it is not there.

    Calling someone a happy-headed ho and yelling fire in a crowded thearter, possibly insiting panic, are two totally different things.
    "When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
  • RolandTD20Kdrummer
    RolandTD20Kdrummer Posts: 13,066
    It's really Kramer's fault....
    Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
    and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
    over specific principles, goals, and policies.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
  • AstroFan
    AstroFan Posts: 193
    RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:
    It's really Kramer's fault....

    Jerry: You see, Elaine, the key to eating a black and white cookie is that you wanna get some black and some white in each bite. Nothing mixes better than vanilla and chocolate. And yet still somehow racial harmony eludes us. If people would only look to the cookie, all our problems would be solved.
  • farfromglorified
    farfromglorified Posts: 5,700
    Abuskedti wrote:
    And if you yell fire at a movie theater - It is up to the crowd exiting small doors to do so in an orderly fashion. When they get trampled, you can cry "freedom of speech" and "it was a joke"

    Huh? If you yell fire at a movie theater, I'm going to look for the fire or the smoke before I start trampling people. As a matter of fact, I don't see a pressing need to trample anyone. Regardless, you can't even show me a case of someone being trampled because of Don Imus's stupid statement.
    Just because the connection is not one that you would make does not mean it is not there.

    It isn't there. That's the problem with your silly logic. And aren't you a guy who has called me names? Where's your belief in the offensive power of words there? If I go kill someone, can I just blame it on your words? Where's your "accountability", Abuskedti?
  • RolandTD20Kdrummer
    RolandTD20Kdrummer Posts: 13,066
    AstroFan wrote:
    Jerry: You see, Elaine, the key to eating a black and white cookie is that you wanna get some black and some white in each bite. Nothing mixes better than vanilla and chocolate. And yet still somehow racial harmony eludes us. If people would only look to the cookie, all our problems would be solved.

    Should I feel guilty for preferring to dunk in regular milk over chocolate milk? Why can't we all just live the Oreo dream like Mr Christie set out for us?

    it's already there spelled out for us in the cookies people...

    :D
    Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
    and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
    over specific principles, goals, and policies.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")

Categories