Annnnnd Don Imus is toast.
They've passed him the Black Spot, as it were.
By Moe Lane Posted in Democrats — Comments (51) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
John Kerry supporter Imus has just been tagged as a conservative -
Sorry, what?
Oh. Permit me to explain. One of the interesting characteristics of the progressive tribe is that great numbers of their members are incapable of distinguishing between conservative, racist and sexist behavior patterns; which of course makes it taboo for them to condemn individuals of their tribe for exhibiting the latter two traits. Normally, this does not raise a problem for them, but sometimes outside scrutiny requires even a member of the tribe to do something about particularly egregious conduct. In those cases, a recognized shaman from the tribe will ritually banish the offender from the community, thus allowing him or her to be safely castigated as one of the dreaded Other. Interestingly, this is a retroactive banishment: the victim will always have been secretly a conservative/racist/sexist duping the pure community, thus allowing any further evidence of past transgressions to be likewise presented and ritually condemned. This has been tentatively called "Eastasia Syndrome", after a quote in one of the tribe's holy books / pornography.
And now you know why Media Matters exists. Brian Maloney has the gory details: suffice it to say that Imus is now hanging out in the breeze.
[Whoops! H/T: Instapundit]
Read on.
Not much else to say, except: frankly, you can keep him, guys. He ain't one of us (although I fully expect the first round of duckspeakers claiming otherwise within the next twenty four hours); he's your problem, so you deal with him. I don't particularly feel like catering to your side's delusion that all sin comes from the Right, so I shan't; and I encourage my compadres to do the same.
I'd also note that this would be time for thoughtful people on the Left to contemplate how quickly they could be cast out into the outer darkness for their own transgressions - which would not have to be nearly as obnoxious as Imus's; or, indeed, transgressions at all - except that five years of blogging has pretty much convinced me that the exercise would be futile.
« Corrupt Democrat Watch, July 10 Edition, Part One — Comments (20) | Pelosi Plays to America’s Enemies — Comments (21) »
Annnnnd Don Imus is toast. 51 Comments (0 topical, 51 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
I forgot to mention former congressman and Senate-wannabe Harold Ford, Jr., a frequent Imus sycophant.
No, they won't be able to change the narrative.
So they will bury it.
I am in a position of defending someone I can't stand.
Was what he did wrong ? yes. So what. let he who is without a glass house throw the first flying pig or whatever.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
Senator Chris Dodds announced his presidential bid on the Imus broadcast.
Sen. Joe Biden was a frequent guest, who seemed to enjoy the glad-handing with the I-man.
Most left-wing journalists were frequent guests. Among them were Frank Rich, the entire cast from Newsweek and MSNBC and NBC, and most everyone else to the left of the average socialist.
And while we are at it, most liberal historians were regular guests, even in their work had been plagarized (and you know who you are, Delores).
And operatives? Well, ask James Carville to list them, as he was probably the most frequent flyer.
And when it came time to circle the wagons, some of these same folks (Jeff Greenfield and Bill Maher, we know who you are) tried to get to the head of the line to assure their future invites.
White liberals have this odd habit, as you pointed out, of protecting the racists in their midsts and then disgarding them with such perjoratives as, gasp, "conservatives."
The disease may be incurable, but the sufferers have been broadcast for all the world to hear.
happens when you give in to them. I'm no Imus fan but he just as well as gave them the finger and walked away with some self respect intact. He still should.
First you beg.
Then you deny.
Then you become the victim.
Already, Option Three is in full mode. NBC has spent the better part of 48 hours on focus group-style analysis of Imus rather than the immediate problem. It hasn't worked. Imus then pimped himself to the White Establisment-annointed racial grievance merchants. He begged. It didn't work.
Now the New York Times, whose Frank Rich was tied at the hip to Imus, has found the real problem. It was Imus' producer (H/T Drudge). He caused it, by God. Look for his trial dismissal in the next 24 hours.
I've been thinking about the replacement program for this time slot. That can call it 'Whines of America' The can use the Dr Pepper song changing the word pepper in the the song to victim.
"I'm a victim,
he's a victim,
she's a victim,
they're all victims,
wouldn't you like to be a victim too.
You’re a persistent cuss, pilgrim.
John Wayne to Jimmy Stewart in The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance
And there is a silver lining for Imus: Rosie OD and Johnny PlayStation remain steadfast in their forgiveness...well, at last account they did.
The key part of the liberal condemnation of Imus is "More and more Americans are coming to understand the damage done by major news organizations providing a platform for bigoted commentary and other conservative misinformation, and they are demanding change". Specifically, even if Imus' comments about the basketball team are considered racist, that does not fit: "a platform for bigoted commentary and other conservative misinformation". Even the furthest left would not call a racist remark "conservative misinformation".
No, what Imus is really being condemned for is having Republicans like McCain and Guliani on his show. That explains why several liberal columnists, in recent columns saying condemning Imus, all pointed out that Imus was different from other shock jocks because of the political content of his show.
So Imus remarks about the basketball team are being used for the same purpose as boycotting the Foxnews debate: censorship. If Imus were a liberal in good standing, then the Left would have forgiven his words, just as NOW covered for Bill Clinton when he was accused of sexual harassment and rape.
Let us not pass over the left-wing minions who were Imus regulars. In fact, I would like to see a Left/Right breakdown of guests. And as far as I know, no Republican and/or conservative ever announced their candidacy for president on his show as did Senator Christopher Dodd.
And for all intents and purposes, the Imus in the Morning hatefest was campaign central for John Kerry.
So to describe Imus as "strayed" is to fall into the leftistas' trap of dismissal after failed defense.
I didn't describe Imus as anything. I didn't express my opinion. All I did was quote from the article this thread is about, which quoted the LA Times as saying:
"NBC's move was applauded by Media Matters for America, the liberal media watchdog group that first spotlighted Imus' remark last week.
"By canceling their simulcast of Don Imus on MSNBC, the National Broadcasting Co. has finally done the right thing," the group's president, David Brock, said. "We hope CBS Radio will again follow NBC's lead.
"More and more Americans are coming to understand the damage done by major news organizations providing a platform for bigoted commentary and other conservative misinformation, and they are demanding change. MSNBC's decision is an important step in the right direction."
If this was in error, my apologies. If not, no problem, either, since I think he will becomea liberal in bad standing very shortly.
I just summarized the Left's judgement, the one I quoted. The left wing source says that Imus fails the test.
soon will come forward with third-party accounts of Imus' attendance at a Klan rally, too drunk to remember he was there.
My opinion would have no impact anyway. But if the liberal media plus the feminist and civil rights organizations "forgive" remarks like this, by ignoring them and saying that the speaker should be forgiven, then the issue blows over.
But the Left has decided that Imus no longer has "diplomatic immunity" and doesn't get a pardon.
You’re a good little Liberal. You make fun of everyone, nothing is sacred. Your remarks and your brand of unfunny comedy should have been grounds for dismissal decades ago, but you soldiered on. You made a nice warm bed for all your Liberal friends to cozy up in and have their morning coffee. Every so often, you’d open your arms to a non-Liberal. You’d feel dirty about it, but it was necessary for karma’s sake. Then one morning, you let it slip. You and your producer are bantering back and forth and it comes out that you hate New Jersey. You call it a nasty state with ugly people. But, you both agree that Tennessee is a fine state with cute people. Tenn., though, isn’t quite so Liberal. In fact, the Volunteer state so strayed to the other side, it abandoned one son (Gore) for another (Thompson), and the former may just become president if chooses to run. How could you? You betrayed your little Liberal friends. Have you gone mad? Have they [Conservatives] infected you? That must be the case. It is the only explanation. Unfortunately, there is but one cure. You must be banished, ostracized from the Liberal community before you infect them too. But there’s something else. Something your Liberal friends do not want known. They also despise NJ. They find it an ugly, horrible place. Your Liberal colleagues have plans for New Jersey. They want to remake it in their Liberal image. This can’t happen if you publicize the truth. Your Liberal friends can’t execute their plans if everyone is watching them. People [Conservatives] might even step up and project NJ. Your Liberal friends fear this. If people were ever to save NJ, give it hope, self-reliance, then Liberals might find themselves banished from society. So, you see, it’s for the good of the cause that your Liberal friends must silence you. You understand, of course – because you’re still a good little Liberal.
R.J.
This line should have read as such:
"In fact, the Volunteer state so strayed to the other side, it abandoned one son (Gore) for another (Thompson), and the latter may just become president if he chooses to run."
R.J.
If Imus doesn't repent, or maybe if he does, then they destroy him and leave him twisting in the wind. Or he agrees to never have a Republican on his program again, then maybe they'll give him a last minute "pardon". Either way, he is an example for others in the media.
I always wondered what exactly happened in the green room when Hillary went on Letterman. It was so obviously scripted for her to hit a home run. No subtlety at all. Perhaps Imus has refused to do something similar in the past.
"...and each wasted evening is
a gross violation against the
natural course of your only life;"
-Charles Buckowski
From:
Larry King Live: Don Imus Discusses Campaign 2000
August 11, 2000
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0008/11/lkl.00.html
excerpt:
KING: ...Before we take the next call what do you make of what's happened to the Reform Party? We now have apparently two Reform Parties and two candidates.
IMUS: Well, the bigger mess the better, like I told the lady from Florida or wherever, I mean, the bigger the mess, the better. So I, by the way, am today, I'm supporting Ralph Nader.
KING: You're coming out for Nader?
IMUS: Yes. In fact, Nader is going to be on Monday. He was on before, and I tend to think of the guy as just being some whining liberal screaming about seatbelts and trees and stuff, but God -- I know you know him, but I mean, he's a great guest. He has a great sense of humor, says a lot of things that make sense, so Nader is our guy.
He just played a conservative on TV (or the radio, as the case may have been). A transparent parody, to be exact, but it gave all his left-wing pals a forum to vent their impure thoughts.
He's basically a scoundrel with a residue of conscience who plays the public depending on where the winds are blowing.
When Imus expanded his NYC radio show to TV, he learned that toadying up to liberals was the best way to move up in acceptance in a way someone like Howard Stern could never do. So he did the book reviews, charities, MSM pandering interviews, but he also had to keep an edge to the show.
While he had a growing audience he could afford to offend the Left, like at the DC Correspondents Dinner when he went after the Clintons or by making fun of the race hustling poverty pimps like Sharpton and J. Jackson, proving he could be an equal opportunity offender. When his audience started dwindling, he just leaned more left to keep his NYC/liberal base. Unfortunately for him, bashing Bush and Cheney wasn't enough to save him.
When he was groveling a few days ago about leading a national race discussion, blah,blah, blah it was apparent he was finished. But he has come back before and I expect he will take a different tack and go after the hypocrites in the media.
We'll see which way the winds blow.
have a link the transcripts. Believe me this one act made me like the guy.
http://imonthe.net/imus/ispeech.htm
"Good evening Mr. President, Mrs.Clinton, honored guests, ladies and gentlemen, radio and TV scum."
"You know I think it would be fair to say, back when the Clintons first took office, if we had placed them all in a lineup -- well, not a lineup -- if we were to have speculated about which member of the First Family would be the first to be indicted... I don't mean indicted -- I meant to receive a subpoena -- everybody would have picked Roger."
"In some cases, the Clintons have not exactly helped themselves. Imagine if back in 1978 Mrs. Clinton had NOT said to Mr. Clinton, "Honey, Jim and Susan are here and they've got some river front land for these great vacation homes, maybe we can make some serious money."
I would say Imus is more radical than liberal.
of how Imus thought a conservative would treat a president, no matter how reprehensible. What you excerpted was so good, in fact, you could trot it out 11 years later and it still has impact.
But day in, day out, the man was a leftist who was quite servile to White Establishment liberalism. Radical? Maybe. Typical NYC liberal establishment? Definitely.
Although I don't consider myself one of his followers. I would call Imus an idiot for saying something so stupid and vile however he now will become a poster child for many in the free speech crowd. I believe in free speech but I also believe in common sense and his stupidity is what got him fired. I doubt he was firm liberal and if you work in the "typical NYC liberal establishment" you have get along with them to some degree. He surely wasn't a conservative and I he wasn't moderate about anything but it would be hard to label him a liberal after all he did strongly endorse Rick Santorum (R) however he also endorsed Harold Ford(D) then he endorsed Joe Leiberman(I) all this past election (Only Leiberman won)
I came realize many years ago that not everybody I disagreed with or disliked was a Liberal some people are far beyond liberal and others are in the middle. Imus was out there somewhere beyond something but he had an independent streak and was a radical.
been fired, for the record. The market would have taken care of him, as it should, for a gratuitous attack on young women (almost girls) who had achieved much but still weren't public figures individually.
As an individual, Imus was in my opinion a liberal who did the Devil's work for his soulmates. He gave the Left a putative "right-of-center" forum, and daily they spewed their hatred of anything that disagreed with their POV, whether it was orthodox or not. One day their supplier crossed that thin line, and they abandoned him.
From the days when dinosaurs roamed, that is the archtype of the typical NYC liberal establisment code of ethics. So some have started to devour their own. Soon all will smell the remains and join the diners.
Hurry, Rosie OD. A meal awaits.
beyond liberal he actually supported Bob Dole in 1996. He agrees with Liberals (mainly the war and hatred of Bush) on many issues but he also disagrees with them on many. I don't like him but he also is far beyond liberal.
I tend to think Liberals are misguided fools but radicals are crazy and unpredictable. It's like Alan Colmes he is the prototypical Liberal and he's very predictable you know exactly where he stands on all of the issues. Alans a nice guy but he is a misguided fool thats wrong 99.9% of the time. Maher and Imus are unpredicatable time bombs that can go off at anytime. The reason many Liberals like them is that they dislike Bush and the War so much but the Liberals are well aware that these kind of nuts can turn on them at any moment.
Imus and Maher pretty well are establishment Left. I would like, for example, someone to point out the "incorrect" part of any Maher broadcast; it would be short and sweet if it exists at all.
The fact that from time to time these two will stray from the simultaenous braying of sheep doesn't alter things. Yet, in the liberal mind (particularly the NYC version), this potential deviation gives a forum to vent without restraint.
To reiterate something posed earlier, if Imus becomes "safe," many if not most of his regulars turned critic will be on his show.
And they won't bray from the right of center.
sites and as I correctly thought Imus has indeed became the poster child for the White Seperatists crowd they now love this guy. I won't put any links to these sites because they are openly racist and I don't want to support their agenda.
I think it's hard to classify Imus as a liberal or conservative. He plays both sides of the fence and seems to stick with guys who are loyal to his show. While he did support Henry Ford Jr., he was also a huge supporter of Rick Santorum. He has also stated quite regularly that he would be voting for McCain in 2008 and supported Lieberman in his Senate bid.
So I'm going to stick to calling him an entertainer. The guy bashes both sides of the aisle regularly and has gone off on some ferocious verbal attacks on Hilary Clinton and the Bush White House. While he may have some different personal beliefs behind the scenes, I think he plays to both sides on his show and is a reason he has been able to nab such high profile guests over the years.
I think what he said was wrong. I also think that it's been blown way out of proportion. He should apologize, and he should lose some black listeners over this. But he's a morning shock jock who has been on the air for as long as I can remember. The odds of anyone going through a political humor show for 4 hours a day for decades and not saying something wrong is slim. It doesn't make what he said OK, I just don't think he's a racist. His show is entertaining at times, and he does bring on big name politicians frequently. His interview style is unique and at times no-holds-barred.
I think maybe he would consider himself a libertarian like Mahr. Certainly anyone who regularly referred to Hillary Clinton as "Satan" and swore to never let her on his show is not someone I would consider a liberal. (Also, I think he voted for Bush twice.)
announced he was supporting John McCain and was Rick Santorum's biggest supporter in the last election (and Lieberman's).
Get your facts straight.
Get your facts straight? You were the one asserting he voted for Bush twice, and that he was a libertarian. What do McCain, Kerry and Nader have in common? That they are libertarians? That's a laugh.
---
Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. - Milton Friedman
I understand that you fiddle around on Erick's private site, which means precisely bupkis here.
The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC.
at least. Here's a problem, though: we have oodles of YouTube video of left-wingers yucking it up with the I-man. Get ready to watch it non-stop at various places.
Incidentally, do you type directly from the script or can you ad lib a bit?
of video with him yukking it up with Lieberman, Rick Santorum and John McCain. Oh, sorry, that's right, McCain isn't considered a "conservative" by you guys.
Joe Liebermann has a rating of over 67% his liberalism by The National Journal. If this was suppossed to make me suddenly think Imus was just another minion of VVRWC, you are on Nazi Crank.
Lieberman, Joe, ID-Conn. 73 74 54 67.5
Carper, Thomas, D-Del. 67 63 67 67.2
Baucus, Max, D-Mont. 60 66 71 66.2
Conrad, Kent, D-N.D. 59 58 77 65.3
Lincoln, Blanche, D-Ark. 58 64 62 62.3
Nelson, Bill, D-Fla. 57 64 58 60.3
Pryor, Mark, D-Ark. 61 59 57 59.5
Landrieu, Mary, D-La. 56 60 55 57.5
Nelson, Ben, D-Neb. 53 29 51 45.3
I'm counting 8 different Democratic Senators who had more conservative voting records than Holy Joe.
"...and each wasted evening is
a gross violation against the
natural course of your only life;"
-Charles Buckowski
There is poll data to back up McCain's non-Conservative status.
...a long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right...
---Thomas Paine---
Lieberman, last time I checked is a liberal Democrat. You must be really unfamiliar with irony that you're twitting us about our complicated relationship with John McCain while throwing one of the reasons Harry Reid is the Senate Majority Leader to our side.
Man, you're an idiot.
Either way, Imus yukked it up with John McCain and Rick Santorum - that's two Republicans. Got anymore? Because if anyone should decide to start listing the many many many more liberals and Democrats he has invited unto his show, you're going to look really really stupid.
And being the ill-informed talking point spewing lady you apparently are, Imus supported Nader (far Left) in 2000 and very loudly endorsed Kerry (far Left) in 2004 - so no, he did not vote for Bush twice.
In other words, he's on your side. Keep him.
George W. Bush: He's A Folder ... Not A Fighter.
with the I-man (and man, I can't wait until the video starts circulating around the 'Net).
1. Sen. Chris Dodd, who announced for president on Imus' broadcast.
2. Sen. Joe Biden.
3. Sen. Charles Schumer.
4. Gov. Bill Richardson.
5. Rep. Harold Ford.
6. Frank Rich (man, that will be a good one).
7. Jonathan Alter.
8. Chris Matthews.
9. Evan Thomas.
10. Sen. John Kerry.
I have more if you want.
As I pointed out before, once these sharks smell Chum In The Water, the feeding frenzy will begin. It is not about Imus, it is about all of talk radio.
Next stop...Fairness Doctrine Reprise!
Imus is a leftist hack, but he does not deserved to be taken off the air for an anti-PC statement.
...a long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right...
---Thomas Paine---
I agree Imus is a lefty hack. I do not really care if his employer no longer wants him working there or not. What really bugs me are Al Sharpton and his flock organizing mass protest rallies and demanding that what they say goes. This just reminds me too much of the mullahs in the nations of Islam working the 'muslim street' into so much protest and rage over cartoons of mohammed. Al and his pals trying to force their own version of a sharia law down our throats is a bad thing.
You’re a persistent cuss, pilgrim.
John Wayne to Jimmy Stewart in The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance
Whether they are politically motivated, or really want to eliminate the competition for broadcast ratings, the liberal media can use the Sharpton/Jackson types to "shakedown" the advertisers. Some liberal media types have already announced that they are going to use the Imus Incident to try to get personalities, like Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Reilly, kicked off the air. But, an interesting thing is happening. There is a pro-Imus backlash developing. Cynical observers, led by Imus, are aware that fame, fortune, and power, are more important to many politicians, entertainers, and journalists, than public morality.
I'll bet the MSM will make it stick.