Topic category:  Other/General

Shock jock Don Imus is a professional insulter, not a bigot. In the name of humor, he insults broadly. Examples: He or members of the cast of his show called Colin Powell a "weasel," New Mexico Governor.Bill Richardson a "fat sissy" and referred to Sen. Ben Nighthorse Campbell of Colorado, an American Indian, as "the guy from `F Troop.'" In the tradition of calling the men of the New York Knicks a group of "chest-thumping pimps," he called the women of the Rutgers basketball team "nappy-headed hos."

That last crack earned Imus a two-week suspension.

I too am outraged that Imus dissed members of the Rutgers women's basketball team as "nappy-headed hos." It wasn't funny. It was foolish.

Worse, it has provided the biased leftist media with a golden opportunity to distract attention from the genuine travesty of justice that is the Duke case as it comes to an end and allowed the likes of the Reverends Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton to take to the airwaves as judges of Imus and treat his self-created predicament as an opportunity to move the media further to the left in the name of political correctness: MSNBC should have a black host on at least one of its programs, say "Cash in the Morning" for "Imus in the Morning."

When the Reverends call for Black "artists" whose "lyrics" are even more vile that what Imus said about the female college basketballers to be fired, they may deserve some attention. So long as they are selectively outraged opportunists, they are worse than Imus.

If the disrespected ladies sue Imus for defamation and win judgments against him (falsely imputing unchastity to a woman is not unpunishable expression), that would be good as far as I'm concerned.

If viewers and listeners choose wholesome fare instead of Imus, great.

If MSNBC substitutes Laura Ingraham or Michelle Malkin or Alan Keyes for Imus, hallelujah.

But a black version of Keith Olbermann would not be a step in the right direction.

Self-described leaders who initially treated the Duke case as an opportunity and have yet to condemn it as a hoax treated the "nappy hos" nastiness as monumental misconduct pose a much greater problem that Imus.

Yes, Imus made some remarks that are not merely stupid, but racist.

But HE is not a policeman or a prosecutor, or a racist.

Those basketball players have not been arrested, much less indicted on bogus charges, like Reade Seligmann, Collin Finnerty and David Evans, college lacrosse players who were falsely accused and wrongfully prosecuted based on their race (white), and thd basketball players will benefit in the long run from the incident. If Imus can hurt their feelings, they need to find out more about him and to learn not to let foolish words by a vulgar comedian going for a cheap laugh ruin their day.

Let's not minimize the monumental wrong that involved misuse of the criminal justice system or exaggerate the significance of a shock jock making a fool of himself while trying to make people laugh at the expense of some female college basketball players on account of their race (black), hair and tattoos.

The Reverend Jackson calling for Imus to be fired is the same one who pleaded to be forgiven for his anti-Semitic reference to New York City as "Hymietown" and for an adulterous affair that result in an out-of-wedlock daughter.

Wikipedia:

"Remarks about Jews

"Jackson has been criticized for some of the remarks he has made about Jews and Jewish issues: that Nixon was less attentive to poverty in the U.S. because "four out of five [of Nixon's top advisors] are German Jews and their priorities are on Europe and Asia"; that he was "sick and tired of hearing about the Holocaust"; that there are "very few Jewish reporters that have the capacity to be objective about Arab affairs"; In addition Rev. Jackson had referred to Jews as 'Hymies' and to New York City as 'Hymietown' in January 1984 during a conversation with Washington Post reporter, Milton Coleman.

"Extra-marital affair

"In 2001, it was revealed that Jackson (married since 1962) had an affair with a staffer Karin Stanford that resulted in the birth of their daughter, Ashley. According to CNN, in August of 1999, The Rainbow Push Coalition had paid Stanford $15,000 in moving expenses and $21,000 in payment for contracting work. Separate from the 1999 Rainbow Coalition payments, Jackson pays $3,000 a month in child support. This incident prompted Jackson to withdraw from activism for a short period of time."

Why is Reverend Jackson harder on Imus than he is on himself?

Likewise, Reverend Sharpton sitting in judgment of Imus is worse than the pot calling the kettle black.

Remember Tawana Brawley and the unrepentant Reverend?

On August 21, 2001, on CNN's "Crossfire," co-hosts Tucker Carlson and Bill Press had this exchange about the Reverend Al Sharpton:

"CARLSON: ...he's destroyed the lives of a lot of people involved in the Tawana Brawley hoax. And I don't think he's adequately answered for it and he defends it if you push him on it. He says I'm proud of it. He says she's still telling the truth when everybody in it has admitted it was a huge lie.

"PRESS: I don't agree with him on that. I think he's moved beyond it, though."

Imus won't be able to "move[] beyond" his problem by proclaiming that he was right (and to his credit he has not tried and admitted he had reason to apologize).

That puts him ahead of Reverend Sharpton on the road to common decency.

The Reverends and Imus all have a long way to go.

Michael J. Gaynor

Biography - Michael J. Gaynor

Michael J. Gaynor has been practicing law in New York since 1973. A former partner at Fulton, Duncombe & Rowe and Gaynor & Bass, he is a solo practitioner admitted to practice in New York state and federal courts and an Association of the Bar of the City of New York member.

Gaynor graduated magna cum laude, with Honors in Social Science, from Hofstra University's New College, and received his J.D. degree from St. John's Law School, where he won the American Jurisprudence Award in Evidence and served as an editor of the Law Review and the St. Thomas More Institute for Legal Research. He wrote on the Pentagon Papers case for the Review and obscenity law for The Catholic Lawyer and edited the Law Review's commentary on significant developments in New York law.

The day after graduating, Gaynor joined the Fulton firm, where he focused on litigation and corporate law. In 1997 Gaynor and Emily Bass formed Gaynor & Bass and then conducted a general legal practice, emphasizing litigation, and represented corporations, individuals and a New York City labor union. Notably, Gaynor & Bass prevailed in the Second Circuit in a seminal copyright infringement case, Tasini v. New York Times, against newspaper and magazine publishers and Lexis-Nexis. The U.S. Supreme Court affirmed, 7 to 2, holding that the copyrights of freelance writers had been infringed when their work was put online without permission or compensation.

Gaynor currently contributes regularly to www.MichNews.com, www.RenewAmerica.com, www.WebCommentary.com, www.PostChronicle.com and www.therealitycheck.org and has contributed to many other websites. He has written extensively on political and religious issues, notably the Terry Schiavo case, the Duke "no rape" case, ACORN and canon law, and appeared as a guest on television and radio. He was acknowledged in Until Proven Innocent, by Stuart Taylor and KC Johnson, and Culture of Corruption, by Michelle Malkin. He appeared on "Your World With Cavuto" to promote an eBay boycott that he initiated and "The World Over With Raymond Arroyo" (EWTN) to discuss the legal implications of the Schiavo case. On October 22, 2008, Gaynor was the first to report that The New York Times had killed an Obama/ACORN expose on which a Times reporter had been working with ACORN whistleblower Anita MonCrief.

Gaynor's email address is gaynormike@aol.com.