Look, I agree that Reid did not say anything that is offensive, exclaimation point. But, if Mitch McConnell had said the same thing that Reid said, it would have been labeled as offensive by those who now are defending Reid. It’s just not that complicated for you to get it. Diogenes the Cynic of lore was said to always be in search of an honest man. You are not being honest.
Irrelevant.
His sponsors bailed because of the broo-hah-hah raised by the professional race-hucksters.
Another one that doesn’t get it.
What do think would happen if Don Imus said the exact same thing Harry Reid said?
And we know this is true because there’s no way to prove it’s false.
Does intent not account for anything? I agree, it was an ill-attempt at humor, but his intent was not to be offensive.
Suppose the majority of players on the team had been white, and Imus said, “Man, what a bunch of Amazons”. I don’t think he would have lost his job, because the race-hucksters would not have come out of the woodwork.
Samething… had the race-hucksters not been looking for a reason to pounce, and made it an issue, the comment would have gone un-noticed.
Well, what do you think? You think the Left would not pounce on McConnell if he said the same thing Reid said?
It counts for something, yes, but it doesn’t make the issue go away. And it’s not really accurate to say “his intent was not to be offensive.” I used to listen to Imus a lot. They got laughs by shocking people, so there is not a clear line between trying to get laughs and trying to offend.
There’s no racial component to calling a woman an Amazon, and it’s arguably a compliment. So you’re right, he probably would not have lost his job for it and Sharpton probably would not have said anything. I’ll go even further and say that if Imus had said the team played great and he was rooting for them, he wouldn’t have been fired for that, either.
Some people might, and if they did, they would be wrong. Since that isn’t happening it doesn’t make a damn bit of difference.
Cite?
You have some proof of this, or is it just their general assholish nature that causes it to be so? I usually find it helpful in understanding things to stick with the situation at hand, rather than dream up an artificial scenario in which the playactors act according to some general feelings I have about their underlying brutishness.
Imus lost sponsors because they didn’t want to lose business. “Race hucksters” do not have control over what people are willing to buy and not buy.
Probably nothing, especially if he said it in private. Maybe some right winders would be offended, though. They seem to be awfully offended by Reid. I think they need to lighten up, personally.
You’re right, let me re-phrase. He was not intending to be as offensive as it turned out to be. Yes, it was his on-air persona to be a degree of offensive. Perhaps he should have been chastised and brought into line. But, for Sharpton to have demanded his head on a pike, that was a little over the top. wouldn’t you agree?
::sigh:: Let’s just say he used it as a perjorative.
Yes it was. There was no way to take that that wasn’t insulting.
What’s racially charged about “Amazions,” and hpow is that comparable to not only making a disparaging comment about a racial characteristic, but also calling them “whores?”
Who are these boogeyman “race hucksters” the right wing is so obsessed with? IDo you really think Al Sharpton exerts any power or influence over anybody?
Not as over the top as calling an innocent womn’s basketball team “nappy headed hos,” but sure it’s over the top. So what? This is America. It’s called free speech. It’s also not the reason Imus was fired. The free market did that.
“Amazon” is not perjorative.
They are legion and they do exert an influence on the gullible public. If and when they say something is “racist”, universal condemnation soon follows. If they don’t then nothing happens. I don’t understand why this is controversial. I’ve seen this happen a number of times. Remember Biden and the “articulate black man” comment that was NOT racial. He still was attacked by the offenderatti and it took the Messiah himself to let him off the hook.
If you have a feminine significant other, call her a “Amazon”, and tell her it’s a term of endearment.
Uh, I think it’s against board rule to wish death on another poster.
You’re imagining things. If it seems like lots of people get offended by some stupid thing uttered by a pandering politician or trolling, idiot shock jock (and Imus isn’t even a conservative, is he? So how does he represent a “double standard?”), then that’s generally because it really is offensive, not because some “race huckster”: bug-a-bears are oppressing rich, white guys.
The fact that the poiltical right is unable to perceive any difference between what Reid said and what Lott and Imus said is an indication of how tone deaf a lot of conservatives really are to the issue.
But, since the subject concerns the “double-standard”, a legitimate way to approach it is to construct a hypothetical situation by reversing the parties.
It wouldn’t really fit. It just means “tall.” My wife is about 5’7. Not particularly tall. She wouldn’t get offended, just confused.
The suggestion that white women everywhere should become incensed if someone called tall women “Amazons” is not a very powerful or persuasive one. Maybe you should try something else. If you try hard enough, I’m sure you can come up with an imaginary scenario plausible enough to demonstrate sufficent imaginary hypocrisy by the left.
Hypotheticals are not demonstrations.