Edwards, Hillary, and Obama on Imus--WHO CARES?!?!?!?!?!?!

[Bicoastal]

Did anyone ELECT this guy (Imus) to his current position? Does he REPRESENT anyone's interests besides his own? Do his hateful words have ANY effect on our government and its office-holders?

On a grander scale, we can debate the subject of race in America all day, but this particular incident is a personal issue--NOT political.

To the media: Can we get on to something else now? Like the war?

[monmouth]

1. Dear God you said it so much better than I. Enough already..

I've been listening to him for over 30 years, prior to rehab. He was younger, funnier and wasn't on TV yet. He and I are the same age, I retired a few years ago with grown children. He surely doesn't need the money. I'm thinking he'll get out of that five-year contract he just signed with MSNBC and spend more time with the wife and kid. Who knows? Way, way too much time being spent on this.

[MedleyMisty]

2. All the threads I've seen

are debating race and don't have that much to do with Imus or what he said. And I think racism is a subject that needs to be discussed. If you don't agree, there is an option to ignore particular threads so you don't have to see them.

[Bicoastal]

7. But why ask our candidates about Imus?

Obama says fire him, Edwards says forgive him, and Hillary is on the fence.

But why are they even being ASKED about one senile old radio host's racial outbursts? It has nothing to do with whoever becomes president in 2008. We have way too many issues that need to be debated, and while race is certainly one of them, Don Imus is not.

[BeyondGeography]

11. Obama is saying much more than "fire Imus"

he's using this to criticize the whole trash-talking culture generally, and being very smart about it, I might add. This issue is right up his alley (another example of the smallness of our politics) and he's making the most of it. Political smarts and leadership on display...sorry you missed it.

[Bicoastal]

12. Well, bully for Obama then...

...if he's using this event as a springboard to discuss race in America in broader terms, instead of merely focusing on Imus. Nothing wrong with making the most out of this situation.

But it annoys me to see people reading too much into Edwards and Clinton's opinions on this issue. And it REALLY annoys me that a phalax of reporters had to swoop down on all of them in the first place (including Obama) saying "Some creepy old radio guy is a bigot! Do you have a statement?"

Do they honestly think this will have an effect on anyone's vote? I'm dubious.

[BeyondGeography]

16. Let's see how it plays out

this thing seems to be taking on a life of its own; maybe it does become a bigger conversation. In one day, Obama has gone from being accused of "silence" on Imus (an earlier thread) to using the issue to make a broader and compelling point. He has steered matters to a place where he has depth and credibility. Makes me feel less than stupid for supporting him...

As far as the business of votes goes, Obama seems to have given this more thought than the other candidates, reason being, he has more at stake. After all, nobody's writing articles like this on Clinton and Edwards:

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/04/11/obamas_silence_on_imus_alarms_some_blacks/

[Daedelus76]

19. I like Edwards response the best

I think Obama is trying too hard to be a black political leader, instead of just a political leader. Barak Obama does best whe he doesn't try and play up his blackness. Aside from Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, and the mainstream media, does this issue really matter? The reality is that black identity politics doesn't have much of a future in a big tent Democrat party. Blacks can be an important constituency, but I don't believe that a single group like that can call the shots on what is, and is not, presidential material. It's kind of sad really Barak Obama has had to almost "pander" to a constituency he doesn't actually represent. In many ways Obama has more in common with many Asian-Americans whose parents came to this country after world war II- he after all has no ancestors that were slaves, and his father came to America in search of better oppurtunities. So he does best when he represents an optimistic message, not a deep soul searching. As the 80's showed with Ronald Reagan, very often people are looking to an optimistic leader after a national crisis. And if Iraq and Bush aren't national crises, what are?

I like Edwards response better. He wants to see some forgiveness and moving on, and he'll wait to see what plays about before he decides if he ever gets on Imus show again. An appeal to peoples better natures, forgiveness in this case, puts him on the moral high ground with the average person.

At any rate, all the major Democrats are winners here. It is an all-star lineup. OTOH, the Republicans have alot of catching up to do, I don't think they'll have much of a chance. Just one word of Mit Romney's magic underwear, or Rudolph Giuliani as a gun-grabbing crossdresser, will have the Republican base all queasy.

[kimmerspixelated]

3. But, see..

The media loves to focus on anything that takes away from the really tragic issues facing humanity. Anna Nicole, they swooped in! Duke Lacrosse case- Bingo! How many other stories can they uncover that takes the focus off of the war criminals?

[AnnInLa]

4. Well, I care, but I get your point

these public incidences of racism, sexism, prompt a public dialogue...a dialogue which is much needed, still yet in 2007. So, while I would like all the public's focus to be on the war as well, some time should be spent with this.

[earth mom]

5. It's meaningless unless they also call out Coulter, O'Lielly, Limbaugh & Robertson for spewing evil

and nasty B.S. too. Not to mention the nasty crap rappers are filling peoples heads with. :(

[blm]

6. All they needed was one statement and GET BACK TO BIZNESS - Pelosi needs back up, Dems.

.

[Forkboy]

8. If they didn't appear or have representatives appear on his show I'd agree.

But he reports on them,has supporters of theirs on his show,even has them on his show.I think it's relevant what they think of someone that they have been able to utilize* to spread their own messages.

*I don't say that to make it sound like Imus is being used somehow.It's a very symbiotic relationship,and they both benefited from it.

As for the media moving on...isn't going to happen anytime soon.The media loves nothing more than covering itself,all in the name of objectivity mind you. ;)

[Benhurst]

9. Whether or not Imus is fired is not the issue. It is not even an important one.

The real problem is the control of the people's airwaves and cable by corrupt corporations, completely unfettered by the fairness doctrine they worked so hard to destroy.

Imus is a piss-ant. There will always be people like him spewing out their poison at local bars. It is his unchallenged access to the public airwaves which makes him dangerous.

As an American he has the right to say whatever nonsense comes into his head. But it is a privilege to broadcast over the public airways, not a right.

We should be focusing our attention upon the owners of the corporate media, not a loud-mouthed underling spreading their poison for profit.

It's easy to go after Imus now -- he's despised and down. But why not use this as an opportunity to go after the corrupt corporate culture which enables not only him but Limbaugh, Coulter and the rest of the fascist choir?

The Fairness Doctrine should be restored. It is within Congress' power to do so. The public airways should be retaken for the people.
Obama and the rest of our candidates should step up to the plate and demand this be done. That would take some courage on all their parts.

Imus is just a symptom. It's time to go after the disease.

[John Q. Citizen]

15. Yep, Dems can make tough and decisive statements about Imus, about

FOX, about whatever.

But the problems started when Reagan dumped the fairness doctrine and Clinton signed the Telecommunications act.

[Adelante]

20. Hallelujah, Benhurst!

The Fairness Doctrine should be restored. It is within Congress' power to do so. The public airways should be retaken for the people.

Obama and the rest of our candidates should step up to the plate and demand this be done. That would take some courage on all their parts.

[ronnykmarshall]

10. It only matters when it's Hillary

and what ever she says or does it's WRONG!

:sarcasm:

[WinkyDink]

13. I can't stand the mush-mouth moran, so whatever it takes, I'm all for.

[karlrschneider]

14. You don't get it, do you? Nothing on the planet is more important than

some old fart making stupid comments about college ball players. Get with the program.

[frazzled]

17. I care

I care because we've spent years--dating way back into the Clinton administration--talking about the media and its misrepresentations and character assassinations and its irresponsibility. And now that someone who has been a serial offender in this category is being called to account on this score, you don't care? I care because it can spell the beginning of an era of accountability in the media ... a small step forward

I care because as a liberal Democrat, I believe that all our citizens deserve to be treated with respect. Racism is a persistent problem, and we cannot let it go unaddressed. And make no mistake about it: racist is as racist does. It's not what you think in your head or have in your heart--if you make statements that hurt people because of their race or gender, you are being racist or sexist. And you don't care about that?

I care because if we ever hope to be successful in achieving our goals with respect to the war and foreign policy, domestic issues like health care and living wages (and believe me: race and gender enter into all these discussions), we have to start by having a media accountable to the facts and living up to the moral standards we expect of them. This isn't an issue in isolation: it's an example of the degredation of public discourse that is preventing us from achieving all kinds of things for the country and its citizens.

[Bicoastal]

18. Bushwah! Imus is a nobody.

Racism in America will not become a bigger or smaller problem if one member of the AM radio community is fired or keeps his job. That's a fact.

We need to have a discussion on intolerance in this country that is not precipitated by the actions of one particular bigot. Moreover, we need to work on race and intolerance in this country by examining ourselves FIRST, and THEN our public policy.

I started this thread for that reason. The vast majority of our DU community admitted that they were accused of saying something racist by someone else, but most felt they were undeserving of such criticism and flatly denied being racists. Who's to say if they are or aren't? A dictionary of racial etiquette? Majority rule? Is there even a right answer?

I feel these are the kind of discussions that will help our country deal with its racial problems, not whether to give the Cryptkeeper his job back.

[Daedelus76]

21. If you want to see less prjudice in society...

... make a society where everybody can get a job and take care of their family.

Look at Yugoslavia. 50 years of being one country and when the crap hits the fan and communism dies, they descend into chaos. Or in Germany- anti-Semitism only got a head of steam when the economy collapsed and the money became worthless. Not all the political manouvering, preaching, and moralism in the world can stop racism and prejudice. Integration won't stop it either. When people are unhappy, they look for a cause. They'll attack other people they see as taking more of the pie than them, that are different than them. You can live on the same block with a black person, go to the same school, and still not really know or care about them. So what difference does it really make to have tolerance classes, forced integration, etc.? I don't think it makes any difference.

In short, prejudice will always be with us. Anybody who says otherwise fails to understand the human condition. It will only become a problem though when there are have, and have nots, and people are locked out of power and oppurtunity. Imus' comments are small potatoes compared to some of the problems we could be having.

Liberals would be far better served to focus their energies on far less utopian ideals, and more concrete actions. So many times things like Hurricane Katrina are reduced to racial rhetoric, when the reality is much more complex, and touches on everything from Global Warming, to poverty, to suburban sprawl (St. John's Parish, for instance), to treatment of the elderly, and yet all you heard in the Mainstream Media and the liberal press was the underlying racism, even though disproportionately the people who died in Katrina in Louisiana were white. The only place they got it right was the majority were indeed elderly.

[The Count]

22. WHEN SHARPTON WAS THE ONLY VOICE ON THIS - I WISHED FOR more

mainstream reaction. So, I care. You think Imus is the reason the war is still going on?