<p>First of all B, you don’t know me well enough to accuse me of anything. I meant what I said about the boys conduct in the face of daunting circumstances. But I also think they behaved very poorly the night of the party and that aspect is something which is conveniently not discussed.</p>
<p>And btw, who would you suggest I would be seeking favor from? You? sokkermom? lol! I might ask some of you the same question…why all the fawning over the Duke lax players?</p>
<p>sokkermom - do I need to refer you to post 183 where you once again turned the conversation BACK to the Duke case?</p>
<p>
I wasn’t basing my observation on my knowing you…I don’t. Nor, frankly, was I “accusing” you. I was basing my statement on your two sort of conflicting statements on this thread. In one, you appear to be lauding the characters of Duke players. In the next, you are going off on them. From that alone, and because your post 193 was pretty vitriolic, I have inferred that your earlier post was insincere. That is my opinion only, of course, and obviously not a fact.</p>
<p>I can’t speak for anyone else who is “fawning” over the LAX players. I myself am not “fawning.” I think the entire forum knows my stand on college drinking and personal responsibility, and none of my kids has done what these boys have done, at least so far. I, perhaps more than many others, have NOT given them a pass on their behavior. What happened may have been totally avoided if they had behaved in a personally responsible manner.</p>
<p>That said, the result of what did happen was <em>SO</em> egregiously exaggerated and <em>SO</em> completely devastating, that these boys were essentially made victims of a power-hungry DA and some hate groups. Now, that they are victims and have suffered damages FAR out of proportion to anything they did, I am mindful of that, and my sympathies lie with them and with their families–Unapologetically and with no reservation whatsoever.</p>
<p>
Perhaps you missed the first several hundred pages of the Duke LAX thread?? 
</p>
<p>~berurah</p>
<p>oh now berurah…lets not mince words. You ‘infer’ that I am insincere…that I have a need to ‘garner favor’? Again, from whom would I be seeking this favor? Can you actually get ‘favor’ on the internet? And now I am vitriolic? Why? Because I think the constant Duke rehash is unseemly? That’s just my opinion…do I not have a right to it?</p>
<p>There is nothing conflicting about my statements on this issue. Perhaps a re-read is in order.</p>
<p>(I did purposely miss most of the Duke thread; it just seemed to go nowhere. Tell me…were there condemnations of the boys’ behavior by our current Duke thread posters?)</p>
<p>
Yes. You understood me correctly.</p>
<p>
Yes, in my opinion, the last several posts have been.</p>
<p>
Yes. You absolutely do.</p>
<p>I am opting to bow out of any further commentary on this, ld. We had what I considered a friendly “on board” relationship, and I have no interest in damanging it further. </p>
<p>peace and no hard feelings, ~berurah</p>
<p>peace to you too B…we know how to agree to disagree right? :)</p>
<p>The duke Lacross boys fully deserved what they got. Their hiring exotic dancers and strippers and playing all the girls (they were typical alpha-male types who spent lots of their free time banging girls, but often seducing them drunkingly to prove they were better). Had they not had that narcissistic reputation none of it would have happened. If I were an empolyer I would not hire them.</p>
<p>“The duke Lacross boys fully deserved what they got. Their hiring exotic dancers and strippers and playing all the girls (they were typical alpha-male types who spent lots of their free time banging girls, but often seducing them drunkingly to prove they were better). Had they not had that narcissistic reputation none of it would have happened. If I were an empolyer I would not hire them.”</p>
<p>Ouch, curryauralingers! That was brutal. Personally, I’m glad the charges against the three Duke Lacrosse players were finally dropped. It was pretty obvious, many months ago that they were being railroaded by the Durham District Attorney for his own political agenda. Whatever the other personal or moral failings of the Duke Lacrosse players, clearly the rape of that stripper was not one of them. I never like to see people punished for crimes they did not commit. And I say that as a black woman who has observed far too much history in which black men have been imprisoned (and even lynched) for rapes they did not commit. </p>
<p>God knows, the Duke case has engendered more tirades of righteous indignation than any other topic in CC history. But this thread is SUPPOSED to be about the offensive comments Don Imus made about the African American members of Rutgers Womens Basketball Team, and the subsequent maelstrom those words created. Can we please make an attempt to return to topic? (I ask this in utmost respectful fashion, and am in no way attempting to “dictate” the course of this discussion, nor stifle “free expression”, so please refrain from any impulse to accuse me of doing so. ;)</p>
<p>…Anyway, given Imus’ long history of sexist, racist, generally idiotic, and otherwise offensive comments on the air, I image Mr. Imus must be just reeling with confusion over this latest turn of events. After all, didn’t he simply do what he’s long been extremely well paid to do—shock and titillate his radio and television audience? Were his racism and sexism secret prior to this fiasco? Why has only this particular insult been deemed as “crossing the line”? Maybe he should call up Mel Gibson, George Allen, and Michael Richards and throw themselves a little pity-party. Perhaps together, they could figure it out.</p>
<p>Now, in addressing the apparent double standard exemplified by the use of Mr. Imus’ offensive language by countless “Rap Artists”, I can only point out another contradictory (though not entirely correlative) social phenomenon: Suppose, during the course of a conversation, you tell me that your children are selfish, spoiled brats? If, days later, I refer to them the in exact same manner to your face, would you not be offended? You shouldn’t be, but you probably will be none the less. Similarly, black people have felt free to call each other the “N” word for decades, but are mightily offended by the same word breeching the lips of white people. Personally, I’m mightily offended by the word, no matter who utters it, which is only one of the reasons why gangsta rap is not allowed in my home. But that word (along with attendant social conviction) uttered on the lips of enough white people, has a long and devastating history that has resulted in the oppression of millions of African Americans. The hair trigger reaction black people have developed to certain racial rhetoric on the lips of anyone representing “the oppressor” has been honed by hundreds of years of painful history, one that has not been erased by a only 40 yrs of civil rights legislation. It’s a visceral thing, not always rooted in “cause”. </p>
<p>As for the Reverends, Jesse and Al, they don’t “represent me”, nor do they “lead me” in any direction.</p>
<p>What a bitter, hateful person you must be, curryauralingers. Geez.</p>
<p>I don’t think the Duke boys deserved what they got, but they weren’t exactly choirboys either. The Finnerty boy had other charges pending before this happenned. Something about a gay bashing incident in Georgetown.</p>
<p>I will get back to the Rutgers hype. A three second comment (which was an attempt at humor) by an offensive Talk show host does not warrant all the civil rights activism and media attention.
That’s my opinion.</p>
<p>And that’s my opinion too. </p>
<p>CBS is remarkable. Last month they put a guy on their board who is the CEO of the company which owns the Def Jam label. Talk about referring to people as “hos”!!!. I guess the ‘justice brothers’ missed that one. </p>
<p>Today’s paper has a sanctimonious quote from the staff memo that says this is about more than Imus , and extends the basis for their action to some concern for the greater social order. </p>
<p>On a different note, the paper also reports that NJ Gov Corzine was quite seriously injured in that crash on his way to the meeting between Imus and Rutgers yesterday.</p>
<p>Tell it, Dadx. </p>
<p>Since Imus wasn’t on, I clicked around. Have you watched the latest on MTV, something about, “I love it when you shake yo hips…” </p>
<p>Imus made a mistake, he apologized; the press is who blew this up and made this really bad for the young women. Sharpton gets on TV to “aks” people to hate. Does he apologize?</p>
<p>^“Sharpton gets on TV to “aks” people to hate”</p>
<p>Wow. Don’t have to dig deep here, do we?</p>
<p>Excellent post, poetsheart. I fully understand why the N word has a stinging, ugly connotation that is interpreted quite differently depending on who delivers it and in what context it is thrown out. But I’d still argue that the rap lyrics, growing more vile all the time, contribute to many of our social ills. But now I’m going to leave the Rutgers topic for just one more post (sorry!)</p>
<p>
There have been thousands of post right here on CC chiding the lax boys for boorish behaviors (I made a good number of them myself.) If that particular house had a history of public urination, noise, and general nuisance behavior, it should have been promptly dealt with by the cops & the school administration. I have no idea why the neighbors had to suffer through that, but it is certainly not a reason to railroad the three wealthiest boys on the team for a crime they didn’t commit.</p>
<p>Another little diversion.</p>
<p>I will not post it here, but if anyone is interested, there is an excellent editorial posted by MOWC on the <em>Duke</em> thread. It was written by a black woman who writes for ESPN magazine. She made some references to the Rutgers incident.</p>
<p>poetsheart~</p>
<p>I, too, appreciated your excellent post. You have fostered understanding in a productive, nonaccusatory way, and because of that, your message was clear and easy to comprehend. And I agree with you 100%.</p>
<p>~berurah</p>
<p>“I have listened to Limbaugh and O’Reilly. I have also listened to Imus. I have NEVER heard either of these two say anything even close to the stuff that has come out of Imus’ mouth.”</p>
<p>I’ve listened to all three of these guys, plenty. (Yes, call me a glutton for punishment.) Maybe it’s just political perspective, but to me, the toxic sputum put out on a daily basis by blowhards like Limbaugh and O’Reilly to a gullible, largely uneducated audience, is far more stomach-churning than Imus’s occasional cranky, juvenile insults. True, the Rutgers comment went far beyond the pale, and he absolutely deserved to be smacked down for it. But lynched by the media and hypocrites like Jesse Jackson, then fired? (WWJD?) </p>
<p>Every time I flip the radio dial to Limbaugh or O’Reilly, I hear hateful, untruthful garbage far more vicious and offensive than most of the inane nonsense that’s come out of Imus’s mouth over the years. Why haven’t these lying, sex-talking druggies been fired or at least, publicly and relentlessly raked over the coals?</p>
<p>
Gosh, I never thought <em>I’d</em> be one to defend OReilly <em>ROFL</em>, but show me when he HASN’T been raked over the coals. I have never listened to Limbaugh…not once, so I cannot speak to that, but there is absolutely NO comparison between the types of things that O’Reilly “spews” and the types of things that Imus spewed. None whatsoever. That you don’t like or appreciate his ideas doesn’t make him “toxic” or “untruthful.” I’m no O’Reilly fan–far from it–but even I have to admit that he holds excellent views on a few subjects, things such as calling judges on not issuing strong enough penalities for things like child sexual abuse. Limbaugh and O’Reilly, because of their conservative stances in a liberal-dominated industry, are raked over the coals repeatedly. To say they are not is to be turning a blind eye to reality.</p>
<p>~berurah</p>
<p>Berurah, you know full well there’s no comparison whatsoever. Limbaugh and O’Reilly have had their problems, but by golly, those seem to have been swept neatly under the carpet and out of public view at the speed of light.</p>
<p>As for O’Reilly’s lies, how about when he blasted Hillary Clinton for not attending a single funeral or memorial service for “regular folks” killed in the 9/11 World Trade Center attack? Shameful, if it was true. But it wasn’t. Among the several services she attended was one for 79 restaurant employees. (Not regular folks?)</p>