Don Imus - the offense is unending

Oh the humanity of it! Shock struck me yesterday as I learned of news that I could not believe. A radio personality made a comment that was racist, or so I was told by a friend of mine.

The radio celebrity was Don Imus and the above comment was sarcasm, if you missed it. Notice the race of my friend is irrelevant for my sarcasm to be used, and it does not change the impact of what I was trying to say.

My point is to the constantly recurring comments of Don Imus. Yesterday he was involved in this conversation.

WARNER WOLF: Defensive back Adams "Pacman" Jones, recently signed by the Cowboys, here's a guy suspended all of 2007, following a shooting in a Vegas nightclub.
DON IMUS: Well, stuff happens. You're in a nightclub, for God's sake. What do you think is gonna happen in a nightclub. People are drinking, and doing drugs. There are women there and people have guns. So there, go ahead.
WOLF: Also, he's been arrested six times since being drafted by Tennessee in 2005.
IMUS: What color is he?
WOLF: He's African American.
IMUS: Ha ha, well there you go, now we know.

Now if you just read the words, it’s hard to tell what is actually meant. The comment could go either way. So I found a copy of his actual words.



Do I feel that was a sarcastic comment? NO.

IF Imus had no asked about the race of Adam Jones, then I might have had some doubt in the intent. If it were another radio personality I might have had reason to believe their words were poorly chosen. But Don Imus is very well known, especially for his offensive and racial remarks throughout his career – most recently and publicly for his attack on the Rutgers Women’s Basketball team.

Why Imus believes he can attack Black athletes (among other attacks on African Americans) is beyond me. His defense that he has 2 co-workers and a producer of his current show that are Black is stupid. They are not in his mind, they don’t control what comes out of his mouth. His racial bias does not change because of those around him, obviously.

When Kelly Tilghman called for the lynching of Tiger Woods, she was on national TV and tried to play the incident as a joke. It wasn’t and the fact that millions of people were watching did not make it any more funny or less racial. The same is true of Imus and his co-workers.

I was pleased with him getting fired after the Rutgers event. Yet I was willing to allow Imus to get a new job. I would have preferred him to have had more time unemployed, and the fact he received a speculated $50 million settlement for his contract really defeated the impact his firing was meant to convey. Still I had hoped it would slap some sense in to him. And this is perhaps why hope was the last thing that Pandora found.

But I will leave it up to you my readers. You have the transcript and his actual words recorded. Tell me what you think of his comment and what should be done this time?

Will Don Imus pay his due? Part 2 - 8.15.2007.2

Continued from Will Don Imus pay his due? Part 1...

Some might say the team deserves the 20 million dollars that Imus just won. Some might say that Imus is a multi-millionaire and won’t miss the money. They would be right that he is rich, but they would be wrong in presuming that his contractually obligated pay is due these women. The pain and suffering they are currently undergoing will not follow them for the rest of their lives. The embarrassment while severe is not going to prevent them from becoming a successful lawyer or doctor or scientist or President of the United States. It will make life in college during the near term harder to get dates, or study or not be the butt of a joke by a drunken frat kid. So I do believe they deserve monetary reimbursement but not excessive amounts.

In America today money determines almost everything. It determines where you live, what job you get, the friends you can have or do keep and so much more. In this case money in the form of Imus’ job was the reason for an unprovoked attack. It should be money that sends the same message to Imus, CBS, and the media industry across the nation. Impacting the bottom line will stick in the memory of all those individuals far longer than comments from Reverend Al Sharpton, newspaper articles, and a huge number of angry bloggers. Take profits away from the shareholders and changes happen over night. Its one of the great things about the American economy and business environment.

I think that it would be a great slap in the face to Don Imus and his former employers that these women take their money and achieve certificates representing their attainment of prominence in various intellectual fields. CBS told Imus to insult people for a living, create controversy, and be mean. Imus decided to be mean and pushed the envelope many times in his career; finally creating enough of an uproar with this last act. Perhaps the best way to prove this corporation, this man, and those listeners and supporters wrong is the realization of success these women can do. But to just throw money at them and take away one of the motivations why they went to college serves them no good nor their communities nor America as a whole.

There is an Ancient saying:

“You can feed a man a fish and he will eat for a day. If you teach a man to fish he will feed himself for a life time.”

These women should have every opportunity to be taught how to fish and not be given a boat full of fish.

This is what I think, what do you think?

Will Don Imus pay his due? - 8.15.2007.1

The sky is blue, earth is the third planet in the solar system, fire burns, and Don Imus is getting sued. Do you notice that in each and every one of those statements the facts are as obvious as they are true?

Finally what everyone should have expected is starting to happen Don Imus is getting sued for his actions in Aprill which I wrote about several times [Imus, Rutgers basketball, and Rev. Al Sharpton, Don Imus is a symptom]. I’m not amazed nor should anyone else be. I don’t think it needs to be said that Imus was wrong for his comments against the Rutgers Women’s Basketball team. Anyone with a basic brain should understand that (should does not mean everyone does).


So far there is only one player that is suing Imus, Ms. Kim Vaughn, but I don’t expect that she will be the only one to sue him. Shortly I expect to see several of the members of the Women’s basketball team to file similar suits. They will likely be combined into one class action suit. While some may want to defend Imus I have no doubt that Imus will lose on the basis of defamation of character and slander. So the only real question is what they win and how much the major media will defend Imus.

Already we are hearing various pundits step up and say that Imus has been punished too much or was punished too excessively for his comments. Already there is a rally cry going out to lessen the impact that this lawsuit is making. Likely because this lawsuit comes at a time right after Imus has won 20 million dollars in a contract dispute with CBS and his on going negotiations with ABC for a new radio job.

I don’t care that Imus is getting a new job, by that I mean that I stand by my initial calls for him to be fired. He needed to be punished and made an example of for what he said. That was done in part with his being fired. That does not mean that he can never work again. I would not deny anyone the ability to make a living in their career after they have paid a price for that offense. That said Don Imus has not finished paying for his actions. Let’s not forget these were actions that he made with out cause for the mere desire to inflict pain on innocent citizens.

So what would I like to see as the final part of his punishment for his wrong doing? I think that Imus should come out publicly and offer ALL the women of the Rutgers Women’s Basketball team their tuition paid until they have finished their bachelor degrees and half, at least, of their masters degree tuitions and a one thousand dollar per month stipend during that same period.

Now let me tell you why. There is no question that what he said inflicted pain. There is no question that what he said was an insult. There is no question that he has no defense against his own actions. So he’s wrong and therefore liable to these women. The women did not go to Rutgers to be defamed or denigrated. They went to Rutgers not to become basketball stars (I hope not, especially with the salaries of the WNBA), but to become educated successful women in what ever field of endeavor they chose. That should be acknowledged supported and publicly praised. In my view there is no better vindication of their ability, talent, and future than to stand up and provide them a head start in their life choices.

Continued in part 2...

Why protest D L Hughley Part 3 - 6.19.2007.3

Concluded from Why protest D L Hughley Part 2...

Is the line hard to draw? At times yes. But intent is the basis of the determination, as is the response. A comedian making a comment that is off-color or based on a tragic event is not necessarily the same thing as say the writing of kenneth eng.

“To call eng insane is to belittle his hate and absurdity. I will not dismiss him as those that could agree with him would find that a rallying call to defend him. I will rather address the issue at hand. Racism. It’s blatant and in this case seemingly universal. When I hear, or read, such ravings I am sorry that such small minds cannot comprehend the obvious attributes and abilities of people in front of them. It is even worse when such an individual has had the opportunity to educate themselves and failed to take the fruit of the tree.”

I also agree with Mr. Hughley in the thought that there must be better things for most people to do. Chasing comedians in their professional duties is reminicent of the persecution Mr. Lenny Bruce encountered. If people want to get change made, why not address the music industry that promotes almost single mindedly gansta rap music that advocates drugs, child abandonment, degredation of women and criminal pursuits. Why attack 1 man, doing his job with the intent to entertain and arguably does so, when there is an institution making tens of millions while influencing our youth in the most base and morally questionable barrage of content daily.

Lastly, if ANY of the women of the Rutger’s Basketball team are offended then Mr. Hughley owes them an apology. I don’t need it nor do the protesters. Funny or not, if they ask for it they deserve it. That is a private matter between him and them. No different than the apology Mr. Imus made after his bile laced commentary. I didn’t need to hear Imus apologize to them, nor would I need to hear Mr. Hughley. As such no one else can ask him to make an apology, let alone make it a national event. To think that such a demand could be made and seriously considered is either an attempt at sensationalism or arrogance.

This is what I think, what do you think?

*<Why protest D L Hughley Part 1...

**Why protest D L Hughley Part 2...

Why protest D L Hughley - 6.19.2007.1

Free Speech. African Americans. Comedy. Each of these are parts of the United States and the world at large. Take any one of these elements away from America and you may not have a nation today, even if you did it would not be nearly as grand, powerful or free. I feel this is a fact, and there is no questioning it.

Yet, when all 3 are combined the outcome can either be extraordinary or devastating. On the positive side is Mr. Bill Cosby, Mr. Richard Pryor, Mr. Dave Chappelle, Mr. Redd Foxx, Mr. Jaime Foxx, Mr. Eddie Murphy and many others throughout the decades. There is no question that each of these men, and women as well let’s remember, have helped advance Civil Rights, helped pave the path that every Black person in America walks today, and an integral part of forging the path the youth and unborn will be walking tomorrow. Such is the power of these combined forces.


On the other end can be seen other figures. Some have been influential others just known by the populace. The were centuries where Black Americans were considered the butt of jokes, performers like Al Jolsen using the right of free speech to demean and hold back millions. While much of that kind of action lives only in the past it still has not left the nation yet. In the 21st century, nearly 500 years after the first Africans were forcibly taken to America, after Civil Rights and riots, after having African American Secretaries of State and while we have a viable candidate that may become President of the United States, we have men like Mr. Don Imus that used the right of free speech that Blacks like the Tuskegee Airmen died to protect to attack innocent, unsuspecting, private African American college students under the guise of comedy.

While these are the extremes, the expanse betwixt is vast and mired in shadows and grayscale. And this is where Mr. D.L. Hughley falls. I mention him because of the recent protest that is being made over his remarks made on the Jay Leno Show about the Rutger’s Women’s Basketball team. Part of the comments made by Pastor Kyev Tatum of Servant House Baptist Church includes

“Imus’s comment was insulting and so was DL Hughley’s. He said it’s time to stop all black performers from such vile attacks - starting with DL. ‘It’s not only that comment,’ Pastor stop all black performers from such vile attacks - starting with DL. ‘It’s not only that comment,’ Pastor Tatum said. ‘He has a history of demeaning our community in such a way that it’s not funny anymore.’ Tatum said. ‘He has a history of demeaning our community in such a way that it’s not funny anymore.’”

Let me mention that I have heard some of the comedy of Mr. Hughley, and I’m not a great fan. He is funny at points, but it’s not really my cup of tea. His television show didn’t hold appeal for me, though friends of mine loved it. His late night show had some moments but overall did not grab me. Essentially I find him a middle of the road comedian, he hits and misses about evenly for me.

Continued in Part 2...

Dark Brown means ... - 4.19.2007.2

Some people have wondered why I have such a crusade against the N-word. I’ve been asked why it’s a big deal, I’ve been told that the meaning has changed. Some claim the word is now empowering, when used by African Americans and those in the hip-hop/rap community. Yet, I feel that there has been no difference in the word in my lifetime, and never will be. Any other thought or excuse is just ignorance of the facts.

Since the events involving Mr. Don Imus and the Rutgers women’s basketball team renewed attention has been placed on the disparaging terms used in this nation casually. But I feel most people have no concept of what these disrespectful terms mean to, or how they affect, the rest of the world. As Americans we have a very isolated view of the rest of the world, but our actions have great impact. Having lived overseas for a time, I have gotten an understanding of this that exceeds that of the norm.

A case in point is the description found on a couch in Canada. There may not be a lot of news on this but it seems that a mother purchased a new couch whose description referred to its color as “N-word brown.” As the furniture store that sold the couch, the supplier, and a software company that designed the tag all point a finger of blame at anyone but themselves the damage is done. The international insult has been made and no one would have notice if not for a child asking her mother what the N-word meant.

Why was the color of the couch described in such a manner? Because a 10 year old translation dictionary equated the words dark brown with the N-word in Chinese. Not 100 or 50 years old, just 10. The definition was so accepted that when the dictionary was updated, no change was made to the software. But why should it?

Across the world music videos and songs proliferate the use of the N-word, and other inflammatory comments, to describe and talk among African Americans. Non-native English speakers seek out tools to define this word, and many have a description that is without any context of the harm of the word. Of course the context is then supplied by the media that the word came from.

You might say so what. Think about it. The N-word does not convey a meaning of just color, but a negative context as well. In the eyes of the world it means criminal, drug dealer/addict, prostitute, and violent savage animal as presented by gansta rap and hi-hop. Almost 15 years ago when I was in Moscow you cannot imagine the surprise when Russians learned I was an American. In their eyes it could not be possible. Black Americans were not smart enough to learn their own language let alone another, we could not understand business or hold jobs, where we went random violence follows as does rampant drug use. In essence we were the N-word. Since I could not fit any part of that description I had to be from Cuba, or Africa, or South America. I was even asked if I was originally from any other country and then became a U.S. citizen. Resolving the image they had in their head of the word and image in the media, and me in person was too extreme to be the same thing. Simply put, since I was not the N-word I could not be African American.

Continued in Part 2

Say What????? - 4.17.2207.1

By guest author Audrey B.

The recent statement and subsequent firing of Imus brings to light a major issue. Are women, particularly black women, getting the respect they deserve? The young ladies at Rutgers certainly did not deserve the derogatory statement from Imus. What he said was not only insulting to African American women but to all women. These are young ladies who are in pursuit of higher education and also athletics. It takes a great deal of talent and intelligence to manage both a college schedule and an athletic schedule. These are women who have made a conscientious choice to do something positive with their lives, and yet a disc jockey thinks that he could use his freedom of speech to degrade them.

I have heard theories that he is a racist. I have heard another theory that he forgot his race for a moment. He thought that he had the ability to talk about African-American women as though he was part of the race.

Let’s explore the second theory. Why would it be acceptable to call young ladies “Nappy-headed Hoes”? When would it be acceptable? Would it be more acceptable if these were sisters shaking it on a rap video? Would it have been more acceptable if Imus was a rapper?

I say it is never acceptable. Women and men must be respected regardless of race, color, religion, or culture. This brings me to the whole of issue rappers. It is never acceptable to refer to women as B……. and Who………
All of us were given life and delivered into this world by a woman. It makes you wonder, would these individuals care if someone was calling their mother or grandmother by the terms above?

As women we can not allow this degradation to continue. We must teach out daughters, sisters, nieces etc that they are precious jewels and always deserve to conduct themselves with respect and be treated respectfully. Our ancestors fought hard to ensure that we receive that respect. We must therefore uphold that respect.

Audrey B.
CEO of FLY-Fostering Leadership in You

Now that Imus is gone - 4.12.2007.1

Don Imus has been fired. A simple statement of fact that carries a huge amount of power. It’s a statement that is important, and it deserves to be understood completely. There is more to this than just his removal for his racist and derogatory statements.


The commentary has been fast and furious since Monday when I think the nation at large became aware of the incident from the previous Wednesday. I have been part of the media that has spoken on this subject, and its ramifications, since Monday having written about 10 posts so far. To say I was outraged is an understatement of massive proportions. But I have also discussed this with many people of all colors and ages and sex. I have read the comments on the blog posts, and I have read other blogs, and watched the many experts and figureheads debate the matter.

I said, “While I am in favor of severe actions against Mr. Imus, I feel Mr. McGuirk cannot be left out either.” I stand by that commentary. I asume he will be losing his position along with Mr. Imus, and that is a good thing. Comments about jigaboos and wannabes are hardly funny, especially in the context that both men presented them. [For those unfamiliar, while the news media has not presented this, later in the same discussion of the Rutger’s womens basketball team these terms were bandied about in addition to the other vile comments.]

I had asked in that same post, “What I would like to hear Mr. Imus, and Mr. McGuirk, explain is what makes the Black women of the Rutgers basketball team hos. Then I want to hear what makes their hair nappy. And then perhaps I can hear how either of these comments have anything to do with basketball or the abilities of these women. I would listen to Mr. Imus explain that, and I’d like him to do this in front of the women that he has nationally demeaned. And then he should still be fired. Not resign, fired. He has given up his right to save face in this matter.” It has now come to pass that all the things I had hoped for have come to pass in one manner or another. I am greatful for that. But this is not the end of this matter.

Ms. C. Dolores Tucker started a movement that rings as true today as when she started it in the 1990’s. Gansta rap “is a crime that we are promoting these kind of messages. The whole gangster rap industry is drug-driven, race-driven, and greed-driven.” The comments by rappers like Mr. Calvin Broadus (Snoop Dogg) in trying to justify and re-define terms like ‘ho’ exemplify that Ms. Dolores was correct in her comments. As I translated the comment of Mr. Broadus into an intelligible wording the potential for damage becomes clear I think, “…he states that any Black woman that is not in or graduated from college, that is living in a predominantly African American neighborhood, that is not earning a middle class income is a ho. If these same African American (actually he does not limit this to only African Americans) women seek a successful Black man [though he does indicate their search is based solely on the economic status of the Black man] and have not achieved equal status on their own, then these women are ho’s….”

Continued in Part 2...

Looking at a cure not the symptom - 4.10.2007.5

Continued from part 2...

Slavery in America was unlike that forms found of nations throughout the world. Unlike other forms human beings were made equivalent to mere property. This is a fact. After ending slavery [which was not a priority of the nation though it is promoted as a critical factor for the Civil War – that’s just romanticizing of the true historical facts] Black Americans were restricted, and isolated with Jim Crow laws and segregation. The nation made no apologies, and tried to hide from what happened to those who were integral to creating the foundation of the nation, by ignoring and shunning those individuals. That too is a fact. That lasted until the 1960’s. And during this entire time anger festered in the belly of the nation. The result of that festering appeared in violence and inequality on all levels.

Today we still suffer from these effects. Yes there is Affirmative Action and other laws that attempt to level the playing field. Of course if equality was actually being espoused there would be no need for such laws, minority or not, man or woman. The fact that I as a Black Puerto Rican have laws that seek to help me gain employment or adjust my ability to get a greater education exist proves that it is not. That is to say nothing of my experiences, which have required me to be better than necessary just to be considered equal to my peers.

But an infection that is let alone does not just stay in one place. It affects the whole in the same destructive manner. While the nation hid from its responsibility in the same way Mr. Imus has, African Americans have hidden from it as well. Drugs have become so prevalent that they are commonplace in the community. Children are born into single parent households in numbers never seen before. Young men are more likely to be killed, on drugs, jailed, or a combination of the above than to graduate high school or live to 25. The legal system is so biased that it creates flashpoints of anger that has decimated cities, and virtually guarantees a conviction and harsh sentence to a person of color, even if they are innocent. Politicians throw away money to undeserving individuals to keep them docile and placated, and as an unspoken penance for past actions. It’s a system that is corrupting everything from the inside out. And corporations feed the fuel by promoting blatant criminals with minimal vocabularies as stars spouting bile.

We need to heal as a nation. I had a good friend who asked me, “what can be done, and where does it end?” I’ve thought about that for decades and I have one answer. You may have seen parts of it in my posts, I’m sure you will see it in future posts. The most important thing and the first step is an apology. We must look in the face of the past, directly, and tell those of us that are the descendants of the builders of all we see and use today that we are sorry for what was done. It may sound simple but it is hardly that. Even in the last several months there continues to be vehement refusals by State governments to even agree to expressing regret for the past.

Finished in part 4...

Don Imus is a symptom - 4.10.2007.3

What a day. There has been a lot of discussion on Mr. Don Imus and his comments against the women’s basketball team for Rutgers University. I’ve written a bit about it as well. I’ve also had, and continue to have several conversations on this with men and women, Whites, Hispanic/Latinos, and African Americans of ages from mid-twenties to the mid-forties. While there is no one that supports Mr. Imus, that I have been in touch with, there are differences in what should be done.

Every woman I have spoken too has been amazed that Mr. Imus would make such a statement. Each has been shocked and outraged by his words. To say that they took his words as offensive is to say the least. Every one of them has been absolute in their decision to see him fired.

As for the men, there are different takes on what the outcome should be. I’ve seen a guy bowled over by the comments, just stunned. I’ve seen a young man that felt it should be shrugged off. I’ve discussed this with a man that felt resignation or firing would be too harsh a punishment. And there have been calls for him to be gone.

So I have absorbed it all. And I have been challenged to explain why I felt the need for Mr. Imus to be fired. I want to share part of my reasoning, because the fact is this goes far deeper to the national psyche than anyone seems to be addressing right now.


Mr. Imus attacked innocent women that never gave a reason for this attack. They did not deserve or engender any reason for it. I doubt that any woman could. But I will give the point that were this a public figure, a politician or comedian or some such, then perhaps there could have been some sliver of humor. Had this been a response to an attack against Mr. Imus, then perhaps there could be some understanding of his words. In either of those cases perhaps there could be room for him keeping his job after an apology. But that is not the case.

I commented yesterday that I felt the decision to suspend Mr. Imus was a vacation being forced on him. I still stand by that thought. My fear was that this was something the corporations behind his radio station wanted to just wait out the storm and go back to business as usual. The fact that the suspension would not take place for a week was puzzling and seemingly confirmation of this. I have heard that the reason for the delay is due to fundraising for charities this week by Mr. Imus. I cannot confirm that right now, though it could explain why the controversy was created, though not excuse it. Obviously NBC and CBS have been evaluating the situation and seeing how the sponsors react, because that is the defining factor for them, money. Were there any other reasons that the corporations cared about action would have been immediate and far sterner.

But the pressure has run up quickly. Mr. Al Roker, who works at NBC, has called for dismissal, along with many others. I have heard that 3 sponsors have left his show, most notably Staples, but again I cannot confirm this. There has been a small protest at CBS corporate offices, and coverage in most news media (except the local Binghamton newspaper). At least one interviewee has canceled so far.

Continued in part 2...

Imus, Rutgers basketball, and Rev. Al Sharpton - 4.9.2007.1

Ok, I’m a bit behind on this event. What can I say, I don’t like basketball and I don’t listen to either the Imus radio show or the show of Rev. Al Sharpton. As such I only recently found out about the disparaging comments made last Wednesday by Mr. Don Imus. To say I am upset is an understatement.

For those that may be in a similar situation as myself, Mr. Imus called the Rutgers women’s basketball, “…some nappy-headed hos”. This was in response to Mr. Bernard McGuirk’s comment, “some hardcore hos.” By the way, no one has asked for the resignation of Mr. McGuirk, though his comments are no less insulting. Obviously there are a lot of problems here.

Let me start with Mr. McGuirk. The fact that he calls Black women hos is despicable. I understand the argument that calling women as such is common because rappers and hip-hop entertainers do so, but that does not make it proper. I have discussed rappers using such insulting terms to describe women, I disagree with that and I disagree with this. He provided the fuel by which the far better known Mr. Imus created this furor. While I am in favor of severe actions against Mr. Imus, I feel Mr. McGuirk cannot be left out either.


As for Imus, well I’m not surprised. There has been a long history of ill-toned comments against African Americans by him. This is just another example, and furthers the viability of his being removed from the air. I find his apologies half-hearted, motivated by fear of losing his position more than his own true feelings.

Mr. Imus has tried to excuse his commentary, when speaking to Rev. Sharpton, by referring to the fact that other African Americans entertainers and people use this term often. That did not fly with Rev. Sharpton, nor does it with me. That seems to remind me of the comment my mother used to say, “If everyone jumped of a bridge, would you do it to?” To claim that one person should be excused because of the infantile actions of another, when both are acting badly, assumes that everyone involved and everyone listening is stupid. I am not, nor do I believe you my readers are either.

I understand that at 66, Mr. Imus is part of a culture that believe calling Black Americans “colored” or the n-word was a commonplace act. He grew up and was taught that African Americans were second-class citizens at best, and that the need to be separated from them socially and economically was an imperative. I understand that that was the truth of the time of his formative years. Yet that does not excuse his actions. As a seemingly intelligent man, who has worked for decades in entertainment and has lived in the probably most diversified city in the nation, he should know better. He should be capable of understanding that individuals are not stereotypes, and that stereotypes invariably target the worst aspects of any group of people.

An intelligent man does not need to demean women. An intelligent man does not need to comment on a group of sports players based on their hair or its style. An intelligent man does not need to make back-handed “compliments” to be humorous. Most importantly an intelligent man accepts the responsibility and repercussions of their actions and comments, even when this is a detrimental result. That is part of my expectation of any intelligent man.

Pleas that Mr. Imus is a good man are irrelevant. Even less relevant by the fact that it is Mr. Imus making the plea. To speak about the acts of kindness he does for a few does not excuse the damage he does to millions. I don’t care if Mr. Imus despises African Americans. That’s his choice. I do care how he speaks about us in a public forum.

I don’t agree with anyone referring to someone’s hair/hairstyle in a discussion that pertains to anything but that. Hair does not define a person any more than skin color. Does the fact that Mr. Donald Trump may have a hairpiece change anything about him? Does that mean that all men that might have a toupee share his exact qualities? If such an argument sounds ludicrous then the words of Mr. Imus are no less so. What I would like to hear Mr. Imus, and Mr. McGuirk, explain is what makes the Black women of the Rutgers basketball team hos. Then I want to hear what makes their hair nappy. And then perhaps I can hear how either of these comments have anything to do with basketball or the abilities of these women. I would listen to Mr. Imus explain that, and I’d like him to do this in front of the women that he has nationally demeaned. And then he should still be fired. Not resign, fired. He has given up his right to save face in this matter.

I do not often agree with Rev. Al Sharpton, but I find his one comment to be correct, “I accept his apology, just as I want his bosses to accept his resignation.”

This is what I think, what do you think?