As always, Dave, right on the money. My impression of why Imus still has a job? Money. WABC probably spends quite a bit of cash on him and his show. They don't want to lose all that precious, precious money, so they keep him on.

I take issue with the caller on wbai this morning who complained of whites in the media selectively attacking racisim. I too am black & while I understand where he's coming from & his point on selectivity may be valid, I think you are right on to attack IGNORIMUS for his provocative, racist remarks. Racism should be attacked by anyone of any color at any time.

Again, thanks for calling out the disgusting pigs. How that old hack can try to argue he's anti-racist is beyond me.

sure, imus needs to go. but not for this comment. i mean, he really was making a sarcastic comment about racial profiling, in his fumbling sort of way.

While Imus may have once again put his foot in his mouth, Warner Wolf, IMO, is the bigger a-hole for rising to the bait when Imus asked "what color is he?" (Adam "Pacman" Jones)
Wolf's response should have been "What's that to you?" or "what does color have to do with it?"

Somehow in all of this Imus is going to get rich from some people who want him to write is autobiography about being a 1st Amendment martyr...

I'm a big fan of yours, Dave, and I thoroughly dislike Imus, but I think you are mistaken in your assessment of this on-air exchange. I think Imus's relationship to blackness is far more complicated than what you seem to be suggesting here. I mean, from what I can tell (as a less than casual listener over the years) Imus expresses his anti-blackness through playing on and reinforcing racial stereotypes for "comedic" effect, while simultaneously expressing some solidarity with black folk. Where's the punchline in the Jones comments? I'm pretty sure he is being sincere when he says his comments were meant as a criticism of racial profiling. That, of course, doesn't mean he's not a racist. But if we're going to call for his head (and, go for it -- the dude is, among other things, terribly unfunny), it seems best to not sound like reactionaries while doing so. Just my 2 cents.

If Imus was trying to speak out against racial profiling, then why did he devote precious airtime to going over a Black player's arrest history -- one that was never even convicted? The thinly veiled implication is that Black players are gangsta and criminal. How is that news worthy or entertainment? I never listen to his show, but how much time does he spend going through white players' arrest history while explicitly mentioning that they're white? If he's so concerned with racism, then what other aspects of it does he discuss? I can't wait for him to turn into an "anti-sexist" too!

Tropes
Your cautionary warnings about sounding like "reactionaries" comes right from the heart of those white establishment liberal gatekeepers who cautioned leaders in the Civil Rights Movement to tone it down, don't be too radical, wait your turn, boy...

There's an old Native American adage that's apropos here and always: "Don't trust anyone who isn't angry."

Racism is alive and well in the Amerikkkan heart - radical response is the only cure.

As usual, Zirin is right on.

Zirin is not always right. Dave, I understand that you sincerely dislike Don Imus. His program, pre-'nappy ho' period, always flirted with racism and other objectionable and low-brow humor masquerading as satire. However, I think in this instance the Imus critics are a little bit off base. There is nothing inherently racist about Imus' comments and we cannot really know what he meant. Given his clear (but failed) attempt to reconfigure his ABC show as more racially balanced, I suspect he really was trying to make the sarcastic observation he claims he was. Maybe Imus doesn't know (yet? ever?) how to chit-chat on the radio without some sort of racial provocation. I'm not cheering for Imus, just suggesting that Imus' goals have gotten far ahead of his habits.

Perhaps Mr. Imus has turned into a modern day Swift. I've never heard the man, but his pictures resemble myself--a leather-necked aging cracker. Imus is an entertainer &, as such, must play to his audience, but in doing so he needn't assume that his audience is racist &/or misogynist. If he were a baseball player he might be sent down to one of many minor league teams to hone his skill. But no. That metaphor might be meaningless in this case. In baseball the game is actually played and frequently improved. In radio Mr. Imus might only go to a local cracker station to hone the wrong side of his nature--the wrong side of 'improvement'. At any rate, it is up to people like Dave Zirin to keep their 'feet to the coals' if I may throw in yet another metaphor.

This man's racist views are so transparent, and the only thing more transparent is the inauthentic attempt at damage control through characterising it at being the opposite of what it was. If he were attempting to make a point about racial profiling why leave the statement so broad and open to interpretation? And the fact that he later described pacman jones as a "great kid" during the subsequent spin job is further proof that he was simply trying to appease angered civil rights groups any way possible, regardless of the facts. When, exactly, did pacman become a "good kid"? Was it before or after he "made it rain" at a dallas strip club, causing enough mayhem to leave a bouncer parylized after being shot by a member of his entourage? Suffice it to say, the emperror has no clothes. But such is the state of mainstream terrestrial radio in america. Remember, he IS a "moderate".

Retraction:
After re-reading the entire transcript of the show in question, I can only conclude that even reluctant defense of Imus is itself 'misplaced energy'. The collective on-air commentary that is prelude to the question of 'What color is he?' is clearly derogatory and assumes that Mr. Jones is deserving of heavy scorn. If Imus is role playing (a la Fox's Colmes), he's doing an even worse job. http://mediamatters.org/items/200806250002 provides the appropriate context in the transcript.

If the bile about the Rutgers basketball
didn't prove he has racist tendencies than,
all who believe flowers grow on concrete
at the mere touch of bush or his acolytes
feet are delusional.

Why can't influentional people, in all walks
of life, have the contemp of danger to call
powell, cheney, rice or bush out for what
they have wrought on this world?

Words that that come to mind are: lying,
murderous scum, no different than any
other scum of the same persuation.

OH! That's Right! The true cowards are
anyone who criticize people who can't
make you disappear. Economically,
socially, or physically.

No impuning your intentions, Dave.

dave you're right. everyone with a brain a heart and a social consciousness knows you are right and either they don't listen to don imus or they do listen to him because they enjoy the aggravation. the fact is that imus rants for an audience of white suburban blue collar (and white collar) kid rock fans who are desperate for an identity, and consequently their failure in that search has lead them down the road of self hatred and the subsequent projection of that hatred upon others. this "circus maximus" (at least in my neck of the woods) exists for the listening pleasure of guys from long island who have a rebel flag sticker on the back of their truck (like they even know what it means) and fuck up my order at the drive through window on a regular basis. that being said until the day that i die i will defend in both word and action the right of any person to speak freely in a public forum. it is ultimately up to the listening public and not don imus and the likes of him to decide when enough is enough. when that time comes we will have seen the last of this type of modern day "archie bunkerism" radio and perhaps we shall all evolve. if only a little.