MSNBC Straw Poll: Imus Firing Wrong

Those online straw polls aren’t any sort of scientific survey of opinion, but neither are they useless. While “scientific polls” are usually heavily laced with respondents who could care less about the issue and simply concoct a plausible sounding answer, online polls sample people who are attentive enough to visit a particular website, and care enough to vote.

Which is why we were at least a little surprised to find an online poll about the Imus firing on MSNBC and, after clicking through to look at the results, seeing at a large majority of respondents oppose firing the shock-jock.

What could these people be thinking? We don’t believe that ¾ of Americans are racist. Perhaps people are tired of political correctness, and failed to distinguish between the merely politically incorrect and the genuinely vile. Maybe people think it’s unfair for key elites, who for so long tolerated Imus’ antics (and even valued the opportunity to be on his show) to suddenly turn against him.

Perhaps they don’t see Imus as any worse than many black rappers and hip-hop “artists” -- whose language has the implicit but clear approval of both black elites and white-run mega corporations.

Perhaps they note that bigots like Rosie O’Donnell and Bill Maher say vile things about Christians and Republicans, and don’t really think that blacks should have more protection than any other group.

We sympathize with each and every one of these reasons.

Still, when we had to vote to see the results, we voted that Imus should have been fired.

But we are looking forward to casting the same vote for O’Donnell and Maher.

Finally Caught Up With You

Imus Firing: Problem For the Democrats

From Sykes Writes, a bit of analysis that makes clear what the media have blacked out with regard to the Imus firing: Imus was a liberal.

Democratic politicians lose a soapbox with firing of Don Imus

His show helped many of them reach a national audience of white males -- a crucial voting bloc.

WASHINGTON — They came by the hundreds that hot August day in tiny Johnson City, Tenn., gathering on an asphalt parking lot to meet Rep. Harold E. Ford Jr. It was not just that he might become the state’s first black senator. More than that, even in Republican eastern Tennessee, the Democratic congressman was a celebrity — a regular guest on Don Imus’ radio show.

And today, with Imus’ career in tatters, the fate of the controversial shock jock is stirring quiet but heartfelt concern in an unlikely quarter: among Democratic politicians.

That’s because, over the years, Democrats such as Ford came to count on Imus for the kind of sympathetic treatment that Republicans got from Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity.

Equally important, Imus gave Democrats a pipeline to a crucial voting bloc that was perennially hard for them to reach: politically independent white men.

With Imus’ show canceled indefinitely because of his remarks about the Rutgers University women’s basketball team, some Democratic strategists are worried about how to fill the void. For a national radio audience of white men, Democrats see few if any alternatives.

“This is a real bind for Democrats,” said Dan Gerstein, an advisor to one of Imus’ favorite regulars, Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.). “Talk radio has become primarily the province of the right, and the blogosphere is largely the province of the left. If Imus loses his microphone, there aren’t many other venues like it around.”

Jim Farrell, a former aide to 2000 presidential candidate and Imus regular Bill Bradley, said the firing “creates a vacuum.”

This week, when Sen. Christopher J. Dodd (D-Conn.) was asked by CNN why he picked Imus’ show to announce his presidential candidacy, Dodd explained: “He’s got a huge audience; he gives you enough time to talk, not a 30-second sound bite, a chance to explain your views; . . . and a chance to reach the audience who doesn’t always watch the Sunday morning talk shows.”

All That Needs To Be Said About Imus

From Jiblog:

Don Imus’ unemployment is not a free speech issue

I had a chance to listen to some Sirius talk radio last night, a little today, and I’ve seen some talk shows on TV at night, and I must say I’m getting irritated by hearing people defend Don Imus on the basis of free speech. Don Imus still has free speech. Nobody sentenced him to hard labor for his comments. Nobody sent him to a concentration camp. He wasn’t executed in the dark of night. What he lost was his far reaching platform for his speech, and it wasn’t the government that took it from him. It was his employers, and his employers took it from him because they no longer wanted to be represented by the things Imus says. The lesson to take away from this isn’t that free speech is being restricted, because it isn’t; Imus could hop on Blogger tomorrow and start insulting anyone he wants. Freedom of speech does not mean that you are entitled to reach millions of people with your words.

Actually, we lied in the headline. There is more to say.

The same analysis that applies to Imus applies to Natalie Maines, the Dixie Chick who first attacked President Bush in London, and then started attacking country music fans. So let’s be consistent, shall we folks.