<p>Imus will be drummed out of “Drumthwacket!”.</p>
<h2>“Limbaugh and O’Reilly are not shock jocks. Imus earned that name for a reason.”</h2>
<p>No Limbaugh and O’Reilly are not shock jocks; they are just morons. LOUD ones at that. But I do see some inconsistencies…yes I do. Imus is fired, and justifiably so, for what he said about the Rutgers team…but Fox turns a blind eye to O’Reilly’s sexual harrassment of a coworker and Limbaugh sure isn’t suffering after his little brush with the law over his illegal drug use.</p>
<p>I have never listened to Imus. I have only listened to Limbaugh once. I agree that he is a loud moron (with an addiction problem). Ironically, I listened the day Rush used the same word that got Imus fired. He used the word in reference to the exotic dancer at Duke. How ironic ! The difference - he apologized sooner I guess. :o</p>
<p><a href=“http://mediamatters.org/items/200604030004[/url]”>http://mediamatters.org/items/200604030004</a></p>
<p>Why didn’t Sharpton and Jesse Jackson lobby to get Rush fired?</p>
<p>^ Perhaps Sharpton and Jackson knew the exotic dancer was not an innocent bystander as were the Rutgers women’s basketball team. </p>
<p>Again, I think the main problem isn’t the words as much as it is the bigoted insinuations about white superiority and the fact that the victims of the Imus jokes truly were innocent bystanders who did not invite this negative attention in anyway.</p>
<p>But Jackson and his rainbow coalition agreed to fund her education (including law school) because he supposedly believed her story. Do you think that offer still stands ???</p>
<p>^ Nooo…of course not! lol! But many people believed this girl or at least gave her the benefit of the doubt in the beginning. That is just as much Nifong’s fault as it is hers imho. She lied (or whatever) and Nifong withheld facts. I’m no Jesse Jackson fan, but I will give him credit for being smart enough to recognize a stinker when he sees one. If he’d known what Nifong knew, no way would he have used the Duke situation to bank political capital.</p>
<p>Actually, it appears that Jackson never talked to the stripper when the offer was made. According to this article (April 2006) the offer stands “even if it turns out she fabricated the story.” </p>
<p><a href=“Jesse Jackson Says Organization Will Pay Alleged Rape Victim's Tuition”>Jesse Jackson Says Organization Will Pay Alleged Rape Victim's Tuition;
<p>"DURHAM, N.C. — The Rev. Jesse Jackson said Saturday that his Rainbow/Push Coalition will pay the college tuition for a black stripper who has made rape allegations against white members of Duke University’s men’s lacrosse team.</p>
<p>And the offer stands even if it turns out she fabricated her story.</p>
<p>Jackson told The Associated Press Saturday that his organization is committed to making sure the 27-year-old divorced mother of two will never again “have to stoop that low to survive.”</p>
<p>Jackson has not spoken with the woman, who is a student at North Carolina Central University, a historically black university.</p>
<p>DNA tests on all 46 of the lacrosse team’s white members failed to match any evidence taken from their accuser. But Jackson said there’s plenty of circumstantial evidence that something happened to her at the March 13 party."</p>
<p>Well, she has obviously fabricated the story. That fact is certain now!
Will he put his $$ where his mouth is? Will the NAACP stand by this decision? Where do you think she’ll matriculate??</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>No. Free speech depends on the context. Commercial speech paid for by an employer? Heck yes the employer has a right to set limits for what can and cannot be said in that context. Same as an employer can require a uniform.</p>
<p>
Good to know there’s a serious deterrent to this type of thing ever happening again. Ya wanna get your education paid for?? Strip…and lie. Yep. That’ll do it. :rolleyes:</p>
<p>"Ya wanna get your education paid for?? Strip…and lie. Yep. That’ll do it. "</p>
<p>Damn,…and my kid decided to join ROTC… :eek:</p>
<p>Stripping and lying would have been much easier. Do you think it’s too late ?</p>
<p>Morons?</p>
<p>Ladies, I hope you are not disparaging people with IQ’s of 50 - 69–people of “low” intelligence.</p>
<p>Perhaps they have Emotional Intelligence.</p>
<p>We should watch the stereotyping, no?</p>
<p>I don’t get the free speech comment. where was the government limiting Imus’ speech? It’s not a First Amendment issue at all.</p>
<p>Edit: never mind. already covered by Conyat.</p>
<p>hmmm…maybe Jackson will pay for her tuition…that remains to be seen. I really do not care about Jackson or the stripper. </p>
<p>Personally, I find all the posts on the Duke lax case aggravating…especially when the case is repeatedly dragged into other discussions on other threads. On the one hand, ‘we’ claim we want these boys to get their lives back, to be able to move on and hopefully suffer no long lasting repercussions from this incident…but on the other hand we obsess over every little detail and we just won’t let it go away. Frankly, if I were their parents, I would want ‘us’ to shut up. </p>
<p>Now what happened to these boys WAS terrible and they certainly did not deserve to be victimized by Nifong…and he certainly deserves punishment for what he did, and I hope he gets it. But how many times can you say that before it’s just redundancy? And these boys were part of group behavior that night which WAS an embarrassment to their school and families. There is all this condemnation of rap music for misogynistic content, yet we don’t have an issue with the lax boys brandishing a broomstick or yelling racial slurs in a public street? We stand pious and wag our fingers because one our kids stole a 50 cent bus fare, but regarding illegal drinking at the lax party …eh not so much?</p>
<p>Don’t get me wrong, nothing the lax boys did merits the treatment they received. But I’m not gonna stick a bow on a pig and put their situation alongside that of the Rutgers girls. The Rutgers girls were playing for the NCAA championship…the lax boys were drunk and partying with strippers. I am mindful of the difference.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t know how the two sitiuations are compared either. The Rutgers women were insulted by a radio host who routinely insults everyone. The Duke lacrosse players had their free lives in jeopardy by a judicial system. I make the odds on their surviving a trial in Durham at no better than 50/50, despite what the attorney general said about the evidence in their case.</p>
<p>“The Duke lacrosse players had their free lives in jeopardy by a judicial system. I make the odds on their surviving a trial in Durham at no better than 50/50”</p>
<hr>
<p>Base on what dadx…sweeping generalizations about Southern justice?</p>
<p>"The Rutgers women were insulted by a radio host who routinely insults everyone. "</p>
<p>I agree. I have seen nothing, other than media hype, to indicate that any of the Rutgers players have suffered any harm at all from this comment. In fact, were it not for the media hype, most of them probably never even heard of Imus.</p>
<p>The white male athletes at Duke were more than just insulted. They were indicted for a crime they never committed. They were discriminated against with words and actions. They were called white hooligan RAPISTS, and there was no outrage by the civil rights groups on their behalf.</p>
<p>So yes, ldmom, there is a huge difference.</p>
<p>
ldmom~</p>
<p>Was this post you made earlier simply rhetoric offered to garner favor then? 
So, we are allowed to express just <em>this</em> much sympathy for the Duke players whose lifes were, in many ways, SHATTERED and irreparably altered by a set of events deliberately perpetrated by EVIL people who should know better?</p>
<p>I can think of NO person on this forum who has given a pass to the LAX players for their less than stellar conduct. None. But, when is the punishment enough? When they’re suspended from school? When one of them loses an excellent job? When their names, their characters, their families’ names, and their school are smeared ad nauseaum for MONTHS and MONTHS? When their families’ bank accounts are diminished by millions of dollars for defense of a case that should have never been brought?</p>
<p>As I recall, the Duke case was introduced to this thread by someone who falsely claimed that all the sympathy was being given to white, male LAX players while the black Rutgers basketball team garnered no sympathy at ALL. This was a GROSSLY false statement that could not be supported.</p>
<p>Tonight, I was watching a program about the Imus event, and a reporter claimed that one of the Rutgers girls had said that she had been “scarred for life” as a result of the disgusting words uttered by a foolish man who was paid big bucks to utter such things. Scarred for life? Really? To this young lady, I’d simply say, “Consider the source.” Scarred for life is what the Duke players…and their families…are. </p>
<p>I would also urge you to remember that we have NO idea about what events took place in that house. We know what DIDN’T take place, but assertions such as THIS:
have remained unsubstantiated, and they came from the same source who claimed to have been raped by three guys, when the DNA of countless other guys, though none of them the three, was found inside of her. There is no reason to consider her account of ANYTHING that went on to be reliable at this point.</p>
<p>~berurah</p>
<p>So if there is such a huge difference sokkermom, why bring the discussion to this thread?</p>
<p>
This comment was in post 128, ldmom. Others besides 1sm have offered a comparison.</p>
<p>Ldmom, why are you perpetuating the discussion if you are not interested?</p>
<p>The discussion was introduced to show that in both cases racial discrimination affected a group of college athletes. Both are currently big news issues with the media. Both involve a lot of media hype.</p>
<p>I think it was a Rutgers alum who introduced the comparison.</p>
<p>Thanks, berurah. Cross post.</p>