I think this likely "got" to the Rutgers players because it was all anyone wanted to talk to them about. How could they ignore Imus when the media were so fixated?

I am they would have much preferred to talk about the amazing season they had just had, but the media were not going to allow that to happen. So their triumph was hijacked. Instead of talking about the greatest moment in their lives, they were forced to talk about the racist rantings of a radio blowhard, with his horrible name for them, for THEM, repeated over and over and over on every web site, radio station, newspaper, and TV show in the land, for days on end.

If you were caught up in such a maelstrom, in such an intense and undeserving way, might it not get to you as well?

In the Americano winner-takes-all mentality, not much, if any, extended press or notoriety goes to the runner up. That accomplishment, which is signifigant, usually is not trumpeted throughout the land. Imus's rant probably makes the Rutgers women of 2006-2007 one of the more recognizable and applauded second placers in all of sports.

I think the one thing that you missed with your column, and it is the most important thing, is that the radio waves are public. They may be controlled by corporations, and the reason Imus got pulled may hark back to the almighty dollar, but the answer to the question, "who are these do-gooders to have taken Imus away from his listeners?", is, "the public."

Now all his listeners will have to turn to are ten thousand other blowhards just like him, who basically dominate our public air waves.

..got more ink than the Volunteers.

I don't know. Maybe some member of the team had great grandmother who was raped by her owner or something, and getting called a whore by a rich white man stirred up a few centuries worth of pissed off.

What if somebody who did not even know him called your son a coin-flipping [something bad]? Publicly.

It is not a complicated issue. One more jerk is off the radio. That is good.

>What I mean is why do the idiot rantings of an out-of-touch gasbag have such power? Why wouldn't the obvious response be to blow him off, ignore him, the same way the players wouldn't give a second thought to an opposing fan?<

A reasonable question, King, but I think the answer is that Imus had the bully pulpit of a high-power FM station that blankets the greater NYC area, plus a basic cable channel beamed into millions of homes, from which to utter his "idiot rantings." The parts of the radio and TV spectrum bandwidth he occupied are, in theory, the property of the people of the U.S., not of CBS, their advertisers, or anyone else.

A better debate would be, what (if any) limits on behavior and discourse should be imposed on what goes out on the public airwaves and data stream, given the tensions between free speech and the public good. There are no intutively obvious good answers to this question; it's a hard one to answer with the best will in the world. Forget Imus (please), *that's* the debate I'd like to see us have.

Radio & TV bandwidth are public property--wow, am I showing my age.

If Rutgers had won the title game by 30 if they, as champions, would have elevated above Imus. That's just whitey trying to drag down our moment and our greatness.

King nailed this one. what I hate about situations like this is that they set a precedent that anyone who says offensive things is not entitled to be on the air. Today, you are offended and you get Imus booted, tomorrow, you might be the offender.

Can someone explain why this comment got so much publicity. Radio hosts say bigoted stuff like this all the time and nobody even notices. That this was even reported in the media at all is an exception. if you do notice you write it off as the rantings of an ignorant blowhard. why did this become a frenzy?

There is a fundamental difference between shrugging off "Rutgers sucks" (a reference to a faceless institution, and an easier slur to both make and ignore) and the statement that YOU (personally and specifically) are are an ugly, unfeminine, butch black prostitute. This seems to come through fairly clearly for me.

I agree wholeheartedly with the call to dialogue and the rest, though.

The April 13 "King Kaufman" column asks why Imus' racist comments pushed people's buttons this time, when he has gotten away with similar racist, sexist and homophobic banter in the past. Good question, easily answered. In the past Imus has directed his venom at other members of the public figure class, the soldiers that march before our eyes as the rich, powerful and famous. With the Rutgers comment, he went after civilians: Young students and athletes working hard to launch their adult lives on a trajectory toward success. Big difference. Imus can attack Senator Clinton, and no one cares: It's just war as carried on in the world of public figures. When he attacks the Rutgers women, it's not war but terrorism, the act of a cowardly bully. So of course people's buttons got pushed, and of course he got the axe. He deserved it. And to answer another question posed by the column: Yes, with Imus gone from the airwaves, the world really is a better place.

Should have not attended all the press conferences etc--"He wasn't talking about us"

King Kaufman asks, "What I mean is why do the idiot rantings of an out-of-touch gasbag have such power?" It's a brave question to ask, and also one that speaks to privilege. The privilege of not having every accomplishment reduced to a question of gender and race. King, I love your column, I think you are one of the best sports commentators around, and a few years ago you actually posted a letter of mine on women in sports in your column, and yet I still think you don't really get the issue of gender bias.

Women, particularly black women, have hundreds, thousands, and maybe even millions of these comments hurled out at them over the course of their lifetimes. But it's not just the comments, it's the timing. Women who rise into the public eye, who are seen as accomplished or powerful, are subject even more so. These players accomplished something amazing: this was one of the best moments of their lives, the kind you want to cherish and remember. And the next day, it comes crashing down because he inserted himself into their moment.

After spending years of enduring comments like these, shrugging them off, while at the same time working to be accomplished and amazing, how easy can it be to shake it off? As women, we live in a hostile environment and those moments we break through, we would like to have them last for more than a day before some millionaire with a mic gets to pull us down into the muck again.