*BREAKING NEWS*

Don Imus show suspended on MSNBC due to comments.

*THIS JUST IN*

The first Amendment was suspened directly before this.

you can read the whole article on:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17999196/

Let me guess.....He's suspended until he does rehab ?

Well I can't deny, "nappy headed hos" was pretty out there, not really acceptable language for public broadcast

..And now Imus has been suspended for his comments, pending possible further action.

That`ll teach you, whitey!

How can one NOT be racist when watching this double standard occur? I`ll remember this when I see the "cracker" comments and all of the "blacks do it better" comments on prime-time TV...unabated.

What a joke this all is really. Racists calling racists, well, RACIST.

He should not have said it. However, I don't like that one or two people are the voice of the blacks and DEMAND his resignation. If we all had our conversations taped we would at some point say something we would regret. Two people should not have the power to call for boycotts, etc. Imus has done good in this world. His work with sick children should be applauded. Accept his apology, learn from it, and move on.

I just heard what he actually said for the first time this morning. Honestly, as DerickM said, "nappy headed hos" is really beyond the pale! What the HELL was he thinking?!?

As for whether he should be suspended or not, that is, as it should be, purely a corporate decision. It has nothing to do with the First Amendment. I would hope and think that he'd lose some of his audience, or that his audience would change and become less mainstream. And eventually lose enough money for his employer that they'd sideline him.

He's just disgusting, really.

When I first heard about the Imus remark - incredibly stupid, by the way - I knew he was going to try and pass it off as a "joke", and that makes me almost angrier than the original slur.

People open their mouths, spew out garbage, and then when they get called on it, they claim the prerogative of humor. Like an insult doesn't count, as long as someone, somewhere, finds it humorous.

Imus' remark wasn't funny. Anne Colter wasn't funny when she called John Edwards a fag. Unless the people on the receiving end of these nasty public insults find them amusing, they aren't funny - ever. "I was just joking" is NOT an excuse. It's not even a reasonable explanation.

Everyone is responsible for what comes out of their mouths (or fingers, in the case of journalists and bloggers and message board members). And when an apology is offered up with the joke card attached, it's only half an apology, as far as I'm concerned. And even when it's sincere, "sorry" doesn't help much when you're the one who has been publicly humiliated.

But the Big Question is....if the hip hop recording millionaires can use certain words, if one part of a community can call each other various names....why is that not acceptable that ALL parts of that 'equal' society use the same words?

Because the "victims" of hip hop lyrics (young women) do not take offense, stand up, and demand a blanket apology from the industry. For the life of me, I can't understand WHY, but they evidently don't feel denigrated by music (and I use the term loosely here) that refers to them as "hos" and "bitches".

The same thing goes for their "homies". You don't have to put up with that shit, girls. Unless you demand respect, you won't be respected. (And yes, it DOES mean "something". It means they can call you a whore to your face and get away with it, and that is so not right.)

I think Imus and his co-host used appallingly insensitive comments.

Imus apologized and seems to be genuinely embarrassed.

His employers suspended him, which will cost hi a great deal of money.

All-in-all, I am satisfied with this conclusion.

In addition, I believe that ANYONE who utters race-based comments should be held accountable for their words.

No matter who they are.

Hi, Yes I heard about this outrage, What a disgusting swine this man is. He is an absolute disgrace. Rev Sharpton is right in calling for this man to resign.

A two week suspension? Pathetic.

Susannah

I think there should be very, very clearly defined lines of what is considered "hate speech" and thus unnaceptable for public broadcast. I am a very enthusiastic anti-censorship advocate, however I realize that there are absolutely some words that are not acceptable to the community at large over public airways. That's the reason why there is no cursing or nudity allowed on prime time tv. In addition, every corporation has the right to determine what is and is not acceptable speech within their organization.

While I have never liked the idea of anyone being "fired" for words they have spoken, I understand the points I just mentioned above.

In this case, I do think that this comment is hate speech and should thus be dealt with accordingly. That being said, I do wish the lines were more clearly drawn (perhaps voted on?). For example, I've heard lots and lots of hate speech coming out of the vile mouths of people like Anne Coulter, Bill O'Rielly, and Michael Savage, and yet they are all still on the air. I guess some groups just have more clout than others? Or maybe louder representatives? I don't know, but it would be nice if we could decide as a community, what is considered appropriate for public broadcast and what is not, and then stick strictly to those guidelines. Otherwise we do run the risk of a slippery slope into unacceptable censorship.

...while my own sensibilities are of course reeling in shock and disbelief [sarcasm /off] what offends me even more is the daily doses by hip hop and other commercial music using similar and worse terms of derogation and disrespect on radio stations and by an entire recording industry....

I never realized Imus was considered a 'shock jock'....certainly for years he has perfused his show with similar comments about any conservative politician he doesn't like and many other individuals.

There was a period where I watched his show for a few months. I grew weary of him and his opinions, and moved on.

It's about time he gets called on it. Free speech in one thing. Responsibility is another. And being held accountable yet another.

But the Big Question is....if the hip hop recording millionaires can use certain words, if one part of a community can call each other various names....wordswhy is that not acceptable that ALL parts of that 'equal' society use the same ?

I have heard this a couple of times and it still makes absolutely no sense to me. What does one have to do with the other? Wrong is wrong right is right point blank. Like my mother used to say if John jumps off a bridge are you going to jump off a bridge.

These people trying to justify what this idiot said blaming it on music are as bad as Imus. I agree that it's not right what some musicial artists say. And nappy head is a derogatory comment in it's self. Did he get that from a musicial artist too?

sure, let's fire Imus for being a jerk and using a phrase on the air that you can hear on rapper radio any day....

The big difference, as I see it, is that rappers are not speaking TO a particular group of individuals; Imus was. I don't like it when hip-hop artists denigrate women in general. I wish women would band together and boycot that garbage. But I would like it even less if Snoop Dog put out a CD in which he called me, personally, a "ho".

re: 'hate speech'

Wikipedia lists this:

Hate speech is a controversial term for speech intended to degrade, intimidate, or incite violence or prejudicial action against a person or group of people based on their race, gender, age, ethnicity, nationality, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, disability, language ability, moral or political views, socioeconomic class, occupation or appearance (such as height, weight, and hair color). The term covers written as well as oral communication and some forms of behaviors in a public setting. It is also sometimes called antilocution and is the first point on Allport's scale which measures prejudice in a society.

I don't see how his comment rises to this definition.

You don't think calling a group of black women "nappy-headed hos" is intended to degrade them? How would you feel about someone who went on national television and called your mother a whore?

I don't see how his comment rises to this definition.

I'd say the term "nappy headed ho's" is degrading, woudn't you?

re: 'hate speech'

Wikipedia lists this:

Hate speech is a controversial term for speech intended to degrade, intimidate, or incite violence or prejudicial action against a person or group of people based on their race, gender, age, ethnicity, nationality, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, disability, language ability, moral or political views, socioeconomic class, occupation or appearance (such as height, weight, and hair color). The term covers written as well as oral communication and some forms of behaviors in a public setting. It is also sometimes called antilocution and is the first point on Allport's scale which measures prejudice in a society.

I don't see how his comment rises to this definition.

however....I'm all for censure and condemation too....as soon as Snoop Dog and the rest of the hip hop rappers are run thru the same grinder of outrage and accountability...and as soon as Rev Sharpton owns up to his T. Brawley comments, I'd be more inclined to support his purported outrage on such matters.

I saw a couple of the player spokespersons this morning, and was impressed with the calm demeanor of both of them. I don't recall the name of either at the moment. They both seemed to have far more grace and style than Imus.

Another objection I have is the overuse of the term "despicable" and similar to describe Imus' stupid comment....to me, 'despicable' has far greater implication as in:

WordNet - Cite This Source

despicable

adjective

morally reprehensible; "would do something as despicable as murder"; "ugly crimes"; "the vile development of slavery appalled them"; "a slimy little liar"

At least the word indicates the direction, I just don't get the degree of outrage when worse every day occurs on the Rapper Network, and the use of such terms is considered 'normal' in some places.....

Perhaps this stupid Imus example can be used to raise the bar for the behavior of all of us; unlikely to happen.

I find this statement repugnant....

re·pug·nant /rɪˈpʌgnənt/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation [puhg-nuhnt] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation

–adjective 1.distasteful, objectionable, or offensive: a repugnant smell. 2.making opposition; averse. 3.opposed or contrary, as in nature or character.

What does Snoop Dogg and the other "hip hop rappers" have to do with that horrible statement that Imus made? So, if they didn't make these comments, what would it change?

I have noticed how some people keep trying to justice this offensive comment by trying to compare it some of the things said by some hip hop artists. Maybe b/c hip hop artists are predominately black. Are hip hop artists they only ones that objectify women? If you are going to call them out what about the commercials, movies, tv shows, and porn industry that continue to objectify women on a daily basis.

In my opinion, I just say that people get over their hypersensitive selves and just move on.

A shock-jock said something offensive...oooooooh big suprise. It's almost like they call them shock-jocks for a reason...*scratches head*

As far as this Rev Al calling him out crap goes, why don't you just call the whole Black Panther clan out while you're at it. Oh, and don't forget Jesse Jackson.

For heaven's sake, get over it.