The issue will be determined by the people not in the room: the sponsors, the money men, the bean counters. Is that alright with you?

I agree with your points, all of them. Imus deserves to be fired for a history of racist statements and highly inflamatory rhetoric. It is not a violation of his free speech rights, and the fact that rap artists use inflamatory jokes of a similar nature is annoying but does not compare.

So, when are you going to fire Dickerson?

But I remember Imus screaming about his 'Jew Bosses' who gave him shit about The Blind Boys singing group. "Those money Grubbing bastards...etc etc" And then McGuirk saying something about 'they probably wanted the Paralyzed Putzes' or something like that.

See that kind of thing sneaks under the radar - mostly because there are all sorts of hate speech most of you are perfectly comfortable with. Which in and of itself is not a terrible evil, but let's just admit that saying something offensive about blacks is just part of the symbiotic relationship we have with those very people who demand to be officially offended by it. Imagine if there was a Black Norman Finklestein telling you that black people have a curried an industry around this thing and it use to suck to money and attention.

Comparison between the two is apples and onions. MSNBC is a news outlet--not a rap station. I did listen to IMUS on MSNBC and found his interviews interesting and insightful. His humor, however, was lame, dated, and pathetic. I felt sorry for Contessa Brewer, whom for some reason he developed some twisted, unknown hatred, calling her on the air among other things 'pig' and 'skank'. That's when I stopped listening. (If MSNBC cared about their employees, that would have been the time to rein him in.)

what did you think i was saying?

You collectively constitute a new Cultural Commissariat. Once Imus is booted off the air completely - I have no doubt that this witch hunt has the momentum to pull it off - it will only be a matter of time before many, many others are targeted, but for different reasons.

*Authors who write "offensive" books. After all, books are published by private businesses and no one has a "right" to be published, do they?

*Singers/rappers who sing/rap "offensive" lyrics. (see above, different context)

*Directors/writers/producers who create "offensive" films. (see above, different context)

*Comedians who tell offensive jokes. (see above, different context)

*Writers who write "offensive" articles, essays or books of non-fiction. (see above, different context)

*TV producers who create "offensive" shows. (see above, different context)

*People who say anything, anywhere at anytime, that is "offensive" to anyone. (see above, different context)

Whoops. That last one looks like it doesn't belong, doesn't it? But it will...trust me, eventually it will.

Rob, we don't have to wait for Imus to be booted off the air for books to be banned in schools, explicit rap albums to be banned from the racks of major retailers, "offensive" films to go unshown at the multiplex, and the Sopranos never to be broadcast on NBC.

You can't use the common practice of selective media distribution to reasonably conclude that "people who say anything, anywhere at anytime, that is 'offensive' to anyone" are in danger of being forcibly prevented from doing so.

Censorship does exist, and much of it is way more jaw-droppingly heinous than Imus losing one venue.

Susan Patron wrote a Newbery Award-winning young adult novel, and some librarians want to ban it because the word SCROTUM is in it! In a private library, that would certainly be their right. In a public library or that of a public school, we have to apply government standards.

Don Imus was not banned from public airwaves, not was he banished from the cultural universe: he's just been dropped from one forum that found him inappropriate.

This event simply cannot be taken on its merits as a bellwether of fascism to come.

Even Imus admits that for years he has been slamming others now it was his turn. He did bring up an interesting point. He is not the only one to dump on others. Case in point, Mr Al Sharpton. I reserve the right to use the title Reverend for those that have go to an accredited seminarie and received the appropriate degree. When is Mr. Sharpton going to apologize to the Duke students who's lives he helped wreck. When is he going to apologies to the gentleman in the Tuanna Braully case another life left in shambles due to the mouth of Mr. Sharpton. It would seem appropriate in his view for him to seek out and destroy all and any individuals he deems unworthy or anti Afro-American. Where was he when those two undercover police where murdered by an Afro-American. Where was he when that policeman was shot by an Afro-American in Brooklyn, The list is endless. He will come to anyones defense if the money and press is appropriate. The three Afro-Americans shot out side a club, all of whom have rap sheet a mile long, coincidentally dealing with the sale of drugs and illegal weapons. Mr. Sharpton is an opportunist that will weigh in to highest bidder. Will someone do something about this man. He hurts everyone both black and white alike. It is in his best interest to keep us apart. One more Giorgio in his closet.

gotcha. understood.

...but while we're at it, can we please, for the love of God, de-elect Al "Tawana" Sharpton and Jesse "Hymietown" Jackson as spokespeople for anyone but themselves?

Aside from their racist invective, both have also, at various times, aligned themselves with Louis Farrakhan (whose Nation of Islam provided the security for Jackson's 1984 presidential campaign) and only occasionally and half-heartedly denounced him, when really pressed and when it was convenient.

And as New Yorkers well know, in addition to the Tawana Brawley case, for which he's never apologized, and his myriad tax-evasion problems, Sharpton has been a racial hustler for quite a while now, including organizing "sit-ins" outside Korean greengrocers who dared to open stores in predominantly African-American neighborhoods, among other essentially criminal acts. This went on for months, and anyone else would have been arrested for it.

These two speak for no one but themselves, yet as sure as night follows day, every time there is any sort of racial controversy, they're the first two you see on every talking-head show. The first, the second, and the hundredth, for that matter. The producers must have them on speed-dial.

That said, I am happy that Imus is no longer polluting the TV airwaves. Aside from being racist, sexist, homophobic, anti-Semitic, and anti-Catholic, he and his sophomoric, sycophantic sidekicks commit a sin perhaps even more serious for entertainers: They're not funny. They're the kind of frat-boy losers who, if they sat down next to you at a bar, you'd grab your drink and run to the other side. Or maybe grab your coat and run for the door.

I met Imus at a fundraiser in the 90s, and he was as much of an asshole off the air as he is on. The MC said something about entering a raffle and Imus said to me something like, "I'd like to enter YOUR raffle." Then he sort of laughed and leered. He then made the same "joke" again -- perhaps he thought it was so sophisticated it had flown over my head -- and then again. And I thought, Jeez, somebody actually PAYS him to say things like that. Ew.

So good riddance to someone who should have been gone years ago.