Boycotting CBS and MSNBC.

Today I have decided to make a stand. Seeing advertisers rely on the Arbitron ratings for commercial prices, I am going to start MY boycott of the boycotting and the weakness corporations exhibit with threats from special interest groups.

I am Joe Public. Today, I have blocked all CBS affiliated and NBC affiliated programming within my home and have removed all the CBS radio presets in all of my cars. I refuse to allow self-appointed "men of cloth" spokespeople of special interest groups to dictate what I can or cannot hear based on opinion or perception. So, I am going to make my voice heard and tell CBS and MSNBC that enough is enough.

Time to thicken the skin and change the station and show these broadcasters enough is enough.

Your rating: None Average: 1 (1 vote)

that the African American (black) community in America would be thought of as a special interest group. What an odd thing to say and think!

By turning off and tuning out and taking a break, hopefully you can research and find a station that spouts words that hurt others. Then you can support that station. After all this is America.

The majority of those who demanded sponorship be pulled were most likely not fans of the show. Punishing Imus was one thing, firing him another unless it's going to be across the board and all of those who express similar terms are fired. Viewers of the show should have more influence as far as sponsors and demanding action since that's the whole reason why those companies advertised on Imu's show was to reach his listeners.

I never listened to Imus, but I tend to agree with what Jason Whitlock has said on this matter.

http://www.kansascity.com/182/story/66339.html

Given it's fairly obvious that the sponsors had a fairly good idea what Don Imus did on his show, it's rather hypocritical of them to bow to public pressure now pretending that OMG they just noticed Imus is a shock jock who at times says inappropriate things...Then again that's what happens all too often, it's an appeasement of the louder voices that at times may not be how the larger group feels. The immediate rush to judgement, the trial by the media and the court of public opinion...

We don't remember days only moments...

I highly doubt that Al Sharpton and Jessie Jackson represent the black community as a whole. I've spoken with, and have heard in conversation and on talk shows that a majority of black people are insulted that Al and Jessie "self-proclaim" themselves as "leaders of the black race". They are worse than ambulance chasers.

Nonetheless, with what I already know, combined with inane polls concerning this episode, the clear majority show Imus should not have been fired. I've already addressed on Toledo Talk the "Al Sharpton threatening boycott against the advertisers", contradicting your illusion that AL was not involved with the advertisers pulling their ads from Don's show. How is it that I am more informed about this Al Sharpton boycott issue than you? You may want to read up on these represenatives you praise.

You're right, Lisa, Don Imus is a "shock jock" icon, for use of a better word, and has been for some thirty years. For these sponsors and broadcasters to pretend that this is a "shocking incident" shows how shameful they are to their audience.

http://toledoohioneighborhoodconcerns.com/blog

How long will it be before Imus and crew head to satellite radio.

...Stern?

I'm not saying anything, I'm just sayin'.....

BRIANIVF You said,

"How is it that I am more informed about this Al Sharpton boycott issue than you."

Why should I be more informed, because I am black?. That is really, really, really stupid!!!!

BrianIVF You said,
"You may want to read up on these represenatives you praise."

Where did I praise any representative? Or did you just assume that because we are all black that I praised Rev. Al Sharpton and Rev. Jesse Jackson?

What I said on Toledo Talk was "While Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson are leaders in the overall black community don't get it twisted, they have no power."

I stand by that statement, they do not have the power to get anybody fired.

No, you should be more informed so your comments don't look uneducated. Nice snide remark. Now you're going to call me out?

Why do you have to make this a racial issue between us? Do you really think I am "attacking" you because you are black? Really?

An excerpt from your quote from your posting on Toledo Talk: While Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson are leaders in the overall black community don't get it twisted From Wikipedia: Overall: 2)An adjective meaning "above everything", "over everything".

Overall means all encompassing in my dictionary. That's carrying a lot of weight. Or are you going to claim that "overall" has fifty different meanings for all ethnical communities?

Why did you label both rev's as "leaders in the overall black community", unless you held them in high regard?

That's my source for your "Where did I praise any (edit) representative?" comment.

Personally, I could care less what statement you're standing behind. I'm personally insulted that you'd make this a racial issue between us instead of banter, especially after addressing your comments with facts and links. I don't assume, Purnhrt.

you said.........

"No, you should be more informed so your comments don't look uneducated."

Excuse me, Mr. College Professor, Rocket Scientist.

Does praising someone and holding them in high regard mean the same thing. Never mind don't answer, I now understand the problem. While we both speak the King's English our different cultural consciousness and our different genetic memories and our different thought processes due to lack of melanin or an abundance of melanin produces different thinking mechanisms.

I didn't make this a racial issue. It became racial when I jumped into the conversation and the race card, pulled by you was automatic.

This statement is the race card from my perspective: "I refuse to allow self-appointed "men of cloth" spokespeople of special interest groups to dictate what I can or cannot hear based on opinion or perception.

The "special interest groups" has African-American (black) written all over it.

purnhrt said "that the African American (black) community in America would be thought of as a special interest group. What an odd thing to say and think!"

I re-read Brian's post three times & he never alluded to anything of the sort. It is YOU that is playing the race card - you're very quick on the draw to do so, to read between the lines & mis-interpret what people say. Why is Imus the only jock being called to task over comments like this? I have two friends who told me about a radio show where they heard (in disbelief) the black radio dude talk about how the blacks need to "exterminate whitie" - just in the last couple of weeks. A woman phoned into Glenn Beck's program the other day upset because she'd just heard the same thing. I have heard Chris Rock, Dave Chappelle, Richard Pryor & many others say far worse. Snoop dog released a quote to CNN saying that when rappers disrespect black women they are aiming it to the black woman in 'the hood', not the black woman who's achieved something great. Like that makes it ok. Sharpton disprespected Jewish people in New York a while back - name calling. And nobod made this kind of fuss over it. You can paint this with as broad a brush as you want, but it's still hypocritical. I don't feel I am a racist at all - but honestly, some blacks are very racist, and it's usually easy to tell which ones are, because they are the ones to pull the race card everytime.

Starling02

I have cut and pasted what Brian posted below:

"I refuse to allow self-appointed "men of cloth" spokespeople of special interest groups to dictate what I can or cannot hear based on opinion or perception."

Do you see the part where he said "special interest groups"? My question was pretty simple and that was "I would hardly think
that the African American (black) community in America would be thought of as a special interest group. What an odd thing to say and think!

Are you all tipping the bottle? Or do I need to tip so we can all be on the same page.

And you read it how many times?

I've watched your antics on Toledo Talk and here, and I have to tell you, you played the "sympathetic race card" first.

Don't patronize me.

It was you that posted this comment on Toledo Talk: Because of Mr. Imus's comments a conversation has been started in black communities all across America.

In case you missed it, it's happening in mainstream media and in other ethnic communities as well, Ms Play the race card.

Purnhrt, I'm about tired of your insinuations towards me and others concerning this topic. It's pretty cut and dried what I was getting at, and it wasn't racial, it was fact. Jessie Jackson has that Rainbow Coalition thing working and Al Sharpton has his little clique as well. I've made it abundantly clear that Al Sharpton threatened to boycott and provided the link to the NY Post that clearly stated that AL threatened to boycott. Yet you chose to overlook and ignore it. What does that say about you as a person, not as a black wooman?

It's people like you that milk this "racial guilt" like you're being condemned, and it's examples like this that disturb me. I'm offended that you'd have the audacity to hang a label on me when you're obviously guilty of being a racist. I'm not going to tap dance around you nor am I going to apologize because your head won't allow you to wrap itself around reality.

I suppose you're going to think there's some conspiracy against you now, huh? I'd hate to be the one to break it to you, Purnhrt, but I will never understand nor appreciate what life is like as a black woman, hispanc man, jew, arab and so on. Nor am I going to apologize for it.

Funny thing, tho, this comment from NAACP.org reinforces my "special interest group" comment: The NAACP was part of a coalition of organizations that participated in the CBS meeting that led to Imus' termination. Additionally, the NAACP has sent letters to advertisers of the "Imus in the Morning" show, its producers and host stations calling for meetings and asking them to reconsider their support of similar talent in the future.

Oh wow. I did research and it sure looks to me that there WAS a coalition to remove Imus from the air. On the NAACP homepage, no less. Funny thing tho, the NAACP didn't admit to "boycotting advertisers", nor am I going to read into the perception that it did silently because I have found nothing to back that claim up. But the NAACP has worked in conjunction with Al and Jessie on numerous occassions, and we both know that Jessie and Al use boycott threats to get their way. Or are you going to deny that too? Call Toyota and ask them about the Rainbow Coalition or Dominoes Pizza about the NAN (edit).

After reading your racially charged comments both here and at Toledo Talk, it's crystal clear you have an agenda. I'm not going to assume what it is, but I'm done feeding you facts just so you can dilute them to your view. Besides, I never graduated from college, I just got this diploma from Macomber that says I completed my educational obligation.

Interest groups are political organizations established to influence governmental action in a specific area of policy. This could be done by persuading legislators, working through a regulatory bureaucracy, engaging in legal proceedings, or other means.

Examples include:

a corporation lobbying to win a specific government contract, often through a lobbying firm or other front;
an employers' organization or trade association representing the interests of an entire industry, for instance seeking favorable tax policy or regulation;
groups representing various demographic sectors of society, such as:
trade unions,
senior citizens,
persons with disabilities or
members of the bureaucracy itself;
groups specifically set up to engage in single-issue politics on one issue only;
think tanks with a particular ideological or economic theory guiding their analysis.
There is a lively debate amongst political scientists as to what exactly constitutes a legitimate interest group. Some hold that only groups with members (for instance, Common Cause or the National Rifle Association) are interest groups.

Others feel that interest groups are any non-government groups that try to affect policy, such as the National Space Society or the Planetary Society. Some people define it even more broadly, to include individual corporations, or even government agencies.

Sometimes "interest groups" are used to refer to groups within society, especially those who are believed to have similar political opinions on an issue or group of issues (e.g. seniors, the poor, etc.) who are not necessarily part of an organized group.

Jessie Jackson's "SPECIAL INTEREST GROUP" Rainbowpush.org: Just hours before CBS announced Imus

You know, the basis for this being brought up in this circumstance does not fit.

The First Amendment came about because of a litany of government abuses, including punishment by death and imprisonment for speaking thoughts and ideas that it did not agree with.

The First Amendment commands the GOVERNMENT not to interfere in free speech, inclusive of the press.

Here is a wiki that touches on some historical abuses by government on people who exhibited speech that it did not approve of: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_speech_in_the_United_States

The Imus situation is one of a free market. He was an EMPLOYEE and a radio personality. So long as he provided the advertising revenue that he did, he was a hero.

Once he offended the advertisers to the degree that they withdraw the almighty dollar from the equation - Imus was out.

Imus IS free to speak whatever he wants, whereever he wants.

What the people who are bringing the 1st Amendment into it want is to force everyone to ACCEPT what he had to say and provide him a commercial venue to express it.

The government has not interfered with Imus - it was free trade that did him in.

If you're here to tell me it's my fault - you're right. I meant to do it. It was alot of fun. That's why I have this happy smile on my face.

So Purnhrt -

"BrianIVF You said,
'You may want to read up on these represenatives you praise.'

Where did I praise any representative? Or did you just assume that because we are all black that I praised Rev. Al Sharpton and Rev. Jesse Jackson?" Submitted by purnhrt on Sat, 2007-04-14 18:44

Well, here for example:

"There is no such thing as Black Racism. It is an urban myth!

Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton are my heroes and Twanna Brawley did not lie!!

posted by purnhrt at 06:45 P.M. EST on Sun Nov 26, 2006"

...And the Freddy's Fashion Mart staff is only playing dead...

...the fact that now, because of "self-appointed men of cloth" of "special interest groups", broadcasters, such as talk show hosts and on-air staff, will now censor their shows and alienate a demographic because of opinion and perception.

Believe it or not, Don Imus had an audience. He's been on the air for thirty something years broadcasting the edge of the line in radio "adult humor". Your perception may differ, but the fact remains Don Imus filled a void on the radio dial that opened an avenue of radio talk show hosts such as "Greaseman", "ManCow", Tom Lychus, and Howard Stern. For this overblown and overdramatisized fiasco which cost the jobs of more than thirty people over satire is wrong. To allow these two-bit opportunists, and I speak of Al Sharpton and Jessie Jackson, to censor something that is totally legal is another step towards the nanny state.

Has nothing to do with race or gender, it has a lot to do with freedom of expression and open opinion. The color of your skin means nothing to me. Your attitude does. These media whores may have won another battle, but if nothing is done soon, America will have lost the war of free will and expression.

Thank you.

BrianIVF

Racially charged comments, race baiting, accusing people, insinuations, racial guilt, and other accusations from you stem from my first comment on this subject? All I said on Swamp Bubbles was "I would hardly think
that the African American (black) community in America would be thought of as a special interest group. What an odd thing to say and think!"

You proceeded to do research of your own volition. I don't have to research ANYTHING that revolves around race, as I have lived as a black woman in America for over 60 years. And it hasn't always been a walk in the park but then again it hasn't been a bad life at all.

But all I said was "I would hardly think
that the African American (black) community in America would be thought of as a special interest group." I don't see how you feel that I have been race baiting you or making racially charged comments.

You are the one who has been making ugly comments to me. Why you are getting so huffy about me and what I write is beyond me. Do I know you? You certainly don't know me.

You have been trying to bait me with how you have been addressing Rev. Sharpton and Rev. Jackson. (Al and Jessie) when Jessie is the female derivative of Reverand Jesse Jackson's first name, Jesse.

I don't think there is a conspiracy against me coming from you, what would give you that idea?

My reality is my life and how I live it, not how you or others see me.

The bottom line is Imus was wrong, whether or not he should have been fired was not up to me or you. But he WAS fired and maybe that will send a message that people regardless of who they are or what they do cannot blatantly offend other people directly and not reap some type of punishment.

Case Closed.

Reverand Jesse Jackson and Reverand Al Sharpton are my heroes and Twanna Brawley didn't lie.

I say what I mean and mean what I say.

I could care less if Imus was fired or not. I've never listened to one episode of Imus' show. Want to know why? Because that kind of humor does not entertain me.

Do I think he should have been fired? No. Why? Because what Imus said was legal and his right under his contract. It's his show and he controls content. The advertisers and broadcasters spines exploded the minute Jesse's or Al's name popped up on the caller ID. Otherwise this would have been another non-event in Imus' career.

I relish and appreciate the ability to just change the station. I appreciate having a diverse selection of opinion and to see that taken away by two media whores is irresponsible, period.

My apologies to Jesse Jackson for massacaring his name.

The problem lies within your perception of the events. You're entitled. But I'll be damned that you too are a hypocrite trying to label me as a racist. Amazing. Well done, Billy. I can see your agenda now, Purnhrt.

I've pretty much tired of your labels, Purnhrt. You can explain yourself away till the cows come home, it dosen't change the fact that your perception of my post was a blanket attack on something you either deny or know nothing about, and your posts show it.

And thank you to everyone that saw this thread as what it was.

Opie and Anthony did a great bit this morning. It was called Anthony quotes Al Sharpton.

Basically he read actual Al Sharpton quotes. It was funny to hear a white guy on the radio say and I'm paraphrasing but this was inaccurate wording but I did get the essential gist of it.

"African Americans are the best chicken fryers in the universe.... Some Chinamen will be frying it up in some dabadaba and we'll stand in line for hours.... the Koreans will sell us watermellons cut in half wrapped in paper with a rubber band around it and we'll buy it."

No word yet as to when Opie and Anthony will be fired.

MikeyA

MikeyA

No problem - it's obvious you're not the only one who buys into the bs from those two race pimps.

Question - what do you think is greater, the $$ that Imus has raised for charity over the years, or the $$ that Sharpton has TAKEN from chairity over the years?

Questions for opinion - serious here....

At what point does a person's history discredit a qualified message?

What characteristics does a messenger need to have to be qualified to comment on a specific issue?

We can rule out perfection - you won't find anybody....

WHO would be qualified to publicly state what Imus said was a load of should NOT have been said without comparing it to history? Just on the merits of that statement at that point in time?

If you're here to tell me it's my fault - you're right. I meant to do it. It was alot of fun. That's why I have this happy smile on my face.

It is people like you who give Americans a bad name all over the world.

The truth of the matter is shock jocks and other people say things as offensive and more offensive than this on a daily basis. Most of it gets swept under the carpet because everyone realizes comedians prey on stereotypes and what not to be funny.

However I did find it ironic how this came out about the same time as the charges in the Duke Lacross rape case were dropped.

Once Imus hit the air the Duke case was pushed to page 8.

MikeyA

MikeyA

FYI

re: the original post.

This is the text of the First Amendment,

"Bill of Rights
Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

Can anyone tell me how this is an obligation on a business?

If you're here to tell me it's my fault - you're right. I meant to do it. It was alot of fun. That's why I have this happy smile on my face.

Hustler magazine won a case of free speech some time ago when uproar occurred with issues of the magazine.

So we can see the right of the magazine to publish was challenged and the magazine sought redress through the courts.

I cannot discern an obligation on a business to adhere to free speech rights given that they are free to publish or broadcast what they will.

If a commercial business is providing a service be it television or radio has an obligation to return a profit to its shareholders and if something interferes with that then the business will rectify the situation.

The FTC has set out regulations on public airwaves and some might claim that the is a free speech violation.
http://toledoohioneighborhoodconcerns.com/blog

All involved know the appropriate paperwork that needs to be done if there was a free speech violation. The FCC and the FTC has regulations and I am sure they are known to Imus's attorneys.

I had an interesting experience yesterday. I was priviledge to see a one man play featuring the attorney, Clarence Darrow.

It was very enlightening and touched on the Free Speech issue circa 1933. One thing Mr. Darrow said is that people learn their prejudices or lack of prejudices from their families. What is discused at the dinnertable is how and where children form their opinions, etc.

Thankfully, I was priviledge to have parents who believed in not teaching their children hate. We were always taught that we were as good as anyone but were not better than anyone.

I hope that whoever Billy, Brian and Starling and some others are, I hope they are a part of the older generation. It would be a shame for young people to have some of the ideas and ideals that are exhibited here when the conversation turns to racial issues.

I made the mistake of being curious about what a nameless right wing pundit might have to say on his radio show.

There and here - I keep seeing/hearing the First Amendment being brought up. You're right - it is not an issue (or it should not be)

If you're here to tell me it's my fault - you're right. I meant to do it. It was alot of fun. That's why I have this happy smile on my face.

Excerpt from the Supreme Court ruling on Hustler vs. Falwell

We conclude that public figures and public officials may not recover for the tort of intentional infliction of emotional distress by reason of publications such as the one here at issue without showing in addition that the publication contains a false statement of fact which was made with "actual malice," i.e., with knowledge that the statement was false or with reckless disregard as to whether or not it was true. This is not merely a "blind application" of the New York Times standard, see Time, Inc. v. Hill, 385 U. S. 374, 390 (1967), it reflects our considered judgment that such a standard is necessary to give adequate "breathing space" to the freedoms protected by the First Amendment. [57]

Here it is clear that respondent Falwell is a "public figure" for purposes of First Amendment law.[note 5] The jury found against respondent on his libel claim when it decided that the Hustler ad parody could not "reasonably be understood as describing actual facts about [respondent] or actual events in which [he] participated." App. to Pet. for Cert. C1. The Court of Appeals interpreted the jury's finding to be that the ad parody "was not reasonably believable," 797 F. 2d, at 1278, and in accordance with our custom we accept this finding. Respondent is thus relegated to his claim for damages awarded by the jury for the intentional infliction of emotional distress by "outrageous" conduct. But for reasons heretofore stated this claim cannot, consistently with the First Amendment, form a basis for the award of damages when the conduct in question is the publication of a caricature such as the ad parody involved here. The judgment of the Court of Appeals is accordingly Reversed.

To start, I am a Caucasian male.

The problem with regards to Imus's firing was that he has offended many a group over his career.

There comes a time when people say enough is enough and it is not isolated to Sharpton and Jackson. There were employees of CBS radio that complained about his comments for some time.

Yes, it is true that he has an acid tongue and that was his sthick. Like I mentioned before I listened to him in the 70's and he was more outrageous then and this was during very heated riots in NYC.

That was then and this is now and it is 30 years later and it would seem that people reacted to a perceived racial comment, quite a few people.

I have listened to rap and hip hop stations here in Toledo and other cities and I did not hear any dj's using the words, honky, whitey and so on. Just the opposite they were race neutral.

For my ears Imus went one step too far and included a nationally known school and that was a big mistake.

With the advent of cable stations the masses are free from the censorship of special interest groups, save for the protests about family values on television and radio.

Imus brought embarrassment to his employer and they did what they felt was right based on the breadth of the complaints from all sources and not just two bantered about.

Just discussion as always

http://toledoohioneighborhoodconcerns.com/blog

I am who I am and I like who I am. As far as your personal comments, I am not diminished by them.

Your comment that: " altho I would enjoy exposing you for who you really are" is foolish as you do not know me.

And Imus is still wrong!

to neighborhood. Quite well stated. Sometimes you just reach a point where enough is enough.

If you're here to tell me it's my fault - you're right. I meant to do it. It was alot of fun. That's why I have this happy smile on my face.

By turning off and tuning out and taking a break, hopefully you can research and find a station that spouts words that hurt others

maybe he could tune into reverand al's radio program.

I think Glenn Beck needs to look in the mirror. He's been known to make these kind of comments too. Not just about black people. But women, fat people, Muslims, Arabs, you name it.

http://nookularoption.libsyn.com/

No kidding. That's why I started listening to the rap stations so I can hear men refer to women as "ho's" without fear of losing their jobs.

MikeyA

MikeyA

BrianIVF

"Racially charged comments, race baiting, accusing people, insinuations, racial guilt, and other accusations from you stem from my first comment on this subject?"

Yes.

"You proceeded to do research of your own volition. I don't have to research ANYTHING that revolves around race..."

Why not? You'd think you'd want to be well informed on facts and not conjecture.

"You are the one who has been making ugly comments to me. Why you are getting so huffy about me and what I write is beyond me. Do I know you? You certainly don't know me."

My making comments towards you was my addressing your labelling of me. Very unappreciated. Why am I getting so huffy? Because you throw stuff out there that's irrelevant to my post and trying to paint me in a light that isn't there. You insult MY intelligence and then ignore facts as they're presented unto you.

"You have been trying to bait me with how you have been addressing Rev. Sharpton and Rev. Jackson. (Al and Jessie)"

Oh please show my where my comments were directed at you and required you to personally respond to my post. You posted on your own, had nothing to do with an invitation from me.

"I don't think there is a conspiracy against me coming from you, what would give you that idea?"

Try rereading your posts.

???

why do you keep bringing this up? this isn't the subject of the initial post or the discussion throughout the thread.

You're just going to have to accept that I do not agree with you. This was not an attack on the whole black race. It was about losing the ability of free expression and free will based on your two heroes pathetic attempt for camera time. It was about one person's opinion of a group of well tattooed female basketball players and that's it. Anyone else besides me see how those players covered their tats up when on national TV for this event?

The nerve of you trying to label me a racist. I have taken the time to read your posts on Toledo Talk, and altho I would enjoy exposing you for who you really are, I'm comfortable with my addressing your issues on this topic alone. Personally, I'm pretty sure quite a few people have garnered an opinion without my having had to explain myself and my intentions to you.

It's not my place to hold your hand and pull you from the bubble you dwell within. I was really tired of reading your responses and trying to figure out where you were comming from with the "black thing" you spoke of, and Starling reassured me that I was correct in my comments. It says a lot about a person when a person, such as yourself for example, can come out and make the first post a racist comment then act like you did nothing. Your false assumptions just completely stun my integrity. Then your allegations of my being a racist, as wrong as they are, just reinforce the mentality if you're representing the black community, which I know you're not. Your irresponsibility with pitching that racist word out there just shows where we as a society stands on racial issues. Everything with you is about being black, whereas everything with me is about freedoms. The nerve to talk about future generations when society has to be concerned about people with your mindset yelling "BLACK" when confronted with something that has nothing to do with race.

FACT: Don Imus is white

FACT: Rutgers basketball team has black players with multiple tattoos.

FACT: Al Sharpton threatened boycott of advertisers if they didn't pull their financial backing from the show, which they did, and in turn thwarted an "alleged boycott".

FACT: Al Sharpton is a self proclaimed "man of the cloth"

FACT: God forgives, Al does not. Hypocrite? Oh yeah.

FACT: Jesse Jackson is a "man of the cloth"

FACT: God forgives, Jesse ambles for camera time and he dosen't forgive either.

FACT: No explanation as to how Jesse and Al can circumnavigate God's main mission statement if they're "representing" God's Word.

FACT: You admitted that these two hypocrites are your heroes.

I could drag this out all night, but I think I made my point.

If there is no threat to income derived from a talk show, the talk show continues. If the talk show makes a success in advertising dollars, the show will continue. When threats against this income become reality, the prevention of loss of income becomes immediate. When income falls off, the show ends.

The purpose of a business is to make money. And yes, I agree that Don Imus is a pig. But Don Imus has been making CBS Radio and MSNBC a lot of money with his show through the advertisers. Had those two nitwits would have just appreciated Don Imus for what he is, they should have just turned the station. Instead, Don loses his job and talk show hosts now pay closer attention to content, which in turn sacrifices the integrity of the show.

Now any person can destroy a man's career if they're "offended" by a stance a talk show host makes and now it is known that there will be results.

It's so sad that some people fail to get past the color issue and get to the core of the problem. The allowance of special interest groups to dictate forum just restricts those in the legal theater to free will and instead of a topic, you get regulation and stifling of free expression.

I hate to think I'm the only one seeing this on the horizon.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.