Submitted by Kathleen Boynton, Apr 19, 2007 13:01

Re: Don Imus
In my opinion April 4th was no different than any other day on the Imus show. The results of the "Do you think MSNBC should have fired Don Imus", vote, as unscientific as these poles may be, clearly favor Imus. It is unfortunate that big mouthed men [self-appointed "leaders"] like Sharpton and Jackson flagrantly, or should I say obliviously, dictate a victim-like disposition or character among black women. The "poor little me" act just does not fit these accomplished women on the Rutger's team. These women had obviously risen above oppressive white supremacy standards . . . at least until Jackson and Sharpton baldly put them back in their place. These men have clearly taken over where white supremacists left off. The Rutger's team looked uncomfortable, almost forced, confronting this issue. These women, along with millions of others, would most likely have blown off the remark[s] made by Imus if it had not been for the twisted motives of these "leaders". People who tune-in to the Imus show expect to hear, in fact look forward to hearing, what Imus has to say. Imus was no different the morning of April 4th than he is any other morning of the week.
I can understand his humiliation and the apologetic disposition he has taken. I think, however, he ought to be apologizing to the Rutger's team for his statements being taken so literally and used as a catapult for a couple of self-aggrandizing self-appointed leaders for the purpose of political acknowledgement and safeguarding the oppression of the black female population. Think about the history here . . . Go to your local library and research, or Google "oppressed group behavior theories" and really look at what is happening here. The "marginals" are the key. The marginals are the individuals who at one time were the oppressed, but can't get over the anger of having once been in that position. It is the marginals who are so focused on getting to the top and fitting in at the top that they, whether they realize what they are doing or not, focus a large part of their efforts on stonewalling the oppressed population from which they came. It is sooooo self-defeating. Their behavior is driven by fear, ignorance, greed and anger. This theory can be applied to groups such as blacks, those living in poverty, nurses and women, just to mention a few.
In today's climate humor must prevail. I do not personally think Imus's reference to the Rutger's women was funny, but that is not the point. The point is that Imus crosses many lines that most people would never think to cross. It's satire. THAT IS WHY WE TUNE IN TO HIM. He IS a good man, he has helped many to succeed (INCLUDING MSNBC), and it is unacceptable the way this was NOT handled by MSNBC. How can what he said on April 4th be any worse than any other day of the week??? He rips on, ridicules and cuts down everyone except for the disabled!!!!! I teach my children at every opportunity (and one of them is autistic) not to listen to the rude comments of others. To rise above it. They will have to deal with this all their lives - we all do.
Imus is the pawn and the decision makers at MSNBC are the culpable ones here for letting this get out of control . . . if the assertions of a select few are to be upheld, and it looks as though they may. And how can shock jock discourse be looked upon as out of control anyway?? Don Imus, I think you have within your power to pursue this and hold MSNBC accountable. By allowing your show to go on, unchecked to this point, MSNBC has endorsed this. I agree with the principal of Collins, Haynes & Lully Advertising in Charlotte, N.C., Nancy Haynes' comment, "As a longtime Imus listener, I am astonished that someone is suddenly upset now. What about all his other rude comments over the past 30 years? In other words, this is just one more example of Imus being Imus," following up with, "It's much ado about nothing. For advertisers to pull out of the Imus program is an endorsement of censorship." I, personally, will look forward to Imus' return - the sooner the better. Kathleen Boynton, St. Ignace, Michigan

Note: Comments are screened, and in some cases edited, before posting. We reserve the right to reject anything we find objectionable.