Jesse Jackson Sticks Both Feet In Mouth

Jesse Jackson really stepped in it when he was caught off camera talking about Obama in derogatory and less than inspiring language. It turns out that the reports of what Jackson said were incomplete and actually worse than first indicated.

Jackson apparently uttered the word "nigger" in the course of his off camera tirade.

The Rev. Jesse Jackson used the N-word during a break in a TV interview where he criticized presidential candidate Barack Obama, Fox News confirmed Wednesday.

The longtime civil rights leader already came under fire this month for crude off-air comments he made against Obama in what he thought was a private conversation during a taping of a "Fox & Friends" news show.

In additional comments from that same conversation, first reported by TVNewser, Jackson is reported to have said Obama was "talking down to black people," and referred to blacks with the N-word when he said Obama was telling them "how to behave."

Though a Fox spokesman confirmed the TVNewer's account to The Associated Press, the network declined to release the full transcript of the July 6 show and did not air the comments.

Nice. Real classy.

This whole mess also shows just how resentful Jackson is over Obama's success thus far. Obama has succeeded better than Jackson ever could - and it's got to be eating at Jackson.

We've also got ourselves quite a double standard quandary given that Jackson has repeatedly questioned the use of racist and misogynistic lyrics in songs and other media. Yet, it seems that Jackson doesn't appear to have a problem saying them himself.

Is it possible that this goes back to something else I'd written; it's that it can be acceptable for African Americans to use words like "nigger" but white people can't. It was only after Jackson got caught saying these things that he's put out apologies.

Someone who truly believes that such language is wrong would not say it in the first place. For a change, Slim Shady Al Sharpton actually agrees: "I am against the use of the N-word by anyone and I think we must be consistent," he told The Associated Press. "We must not use the word.""

Jackson's time as a leading political figure came to an end a generation ago, but no one told him. It's time for someone to tell him.

Where's the Speech Police On This?

A black rapper engages in assaults of teenagers on stage and uses vile language both on stage and in his recorded albums, and yet no outrage exhibited from the likes of Sharpton or Jackson. Did they not hear about this?

Sharpton is holding a rally today, but will he bring his considerable weight to bear on this matter? Does it matter that the assault took place in Trinidad and not in the US? This is a rapper who is on a US record label and whose actions are reprehensible and criminal.

The Rev. Al Sharpton will be among a group of activists attending the National Action Network (NAN)'s march protesting sexism, racism, and homophobia in music and images perpetuated in the recording industry tomorrow (May 3).

"We need to deal with N-word and the misogyny of calling our women b***hes and hoes," Sharpton told AllHipHop.com. "No other community is disparaged by these record companies, but us."

Sharpton pointed to an incident in which Michael Jackson offended members of the Jewish community when he sang "Jew me/sue me" and "Kick me/Kike me" on his hit song "They Don't Care About Us."

"They took the CD's [Jackson's HIStory ] out of the stores. When police felt offended about Ice-T, they froze that," Sharpton continued. "It's almost like they are being cajoled and other cases rewarded to denounce Black people. If you can have a limit to what artistic freedoms you give other people, you ought to have it for Black people and women."

And will you demand that Akon's records be pulled and that radio stations stop playing his songs? Akon's actions go beyond simply piling obscenities and vile statements on top of each other in his music, but engaging in actual criminal behavior. Will Sharpton denounce this? It's a pretty easy target considering the actions involved. Or, is Sharpton engaging in selective outrage?

That remains to be seen. Can Sharpton do the right thing and denounce Akon?

Michelle Malkin has more, including how major corporations are involved and making money off Akon and others who peddle his misogynistic messages.

Speech and Debate

What exactly is acceptable speech and why should anyone seek to limit it (excepting fighting words and words that seek to cause violence). Based on the Imus case, it is increasingly clear that based on the color of your skin you can say some things but not others. And it's not just the content of the words, but how they're used. It's the latter that supposedly got Imus in trouble while others who use similar language are able to get by without so much as a slap on the wrist.

They're just words.

You can say Kurt Goudy has two balls on him in the course of calling a ball game, but you'd get in trouble if you said that Kurt Goudy just got hit in the balls (apologies to George Carlin).

Words are just that - they're a way to express ourselves and some words carry meanings that invoke strong emotions - good or bad. Some just sound funny when you say them. Mahwah or Ho Ho Kus comes to mind. Others have been deemed to be off limits to the airwaves on public broadcast networks (the seven words - ooohh I might catch cooties or someone else might catch cooties if they're said). But apparently there are even more words that are off limits than the seven words. Not because the government says so, but because self professed arbiters of speech say so.

Where was their outcry over the use of the words "Negro" and "nigger" in the movie Pulp Fiction? This is one of my favorite movies, and was a very successful movie lauded by critics around the world (winning multiple Oscars and other awards). One of the reasons was the witty dialogue, which happened to include repeated usage of those two words.

Of course, both those words were used not only by the white characters, but black ones. Does that make a difference? Should it make a difference?

Black rappers can use the words nappy and ho, but a white talk show host can't. There's something wrong with that.

UPDATE:
There are a number of black ministers who are coming forward to challenge the hip hop and rap communities to change their lyrics.

"We have been aware of the recurring theme that is best characterized by the term double standard," said Soaries, who heads the First Baptist Church of Lincoln Gardens. "The culture has produced language that has denigrated women. Our question as we have gone through this week, and now we've had a minute to lift our heads and ask what shall we do about that?"

Soaries is trying to build upon the momentum of Imus' firing towards doing something about the images and lyrics in some popular music.

There's actually a lot of Hip-Hop that has a positive message, particularly a recent wave from down south, but you don't hear it on New York City radio, and that's part of the problem.

In fact, as the minister noted, the black community has marched on radio stations, record labels and rap acts for years, but their pleas have gotten little attention.

"What the young people speak, the way they think is a consequence of experiences and comments that they've seen adults turn a blind eye to," Rev. H. Grady James III said.

CBS 2 contacted two of the radio stations that might be affected from ministers challenging certain lyrics, but Power 105 and Hot 97 said they would have nothing to say.

They haven't gotten attention because they're not Al Sharpton or Jesse Jackson. Also, these ministers are taking a different approach that doesn't demand firings. I happen to think that it's a better approach than firing, though it's unlikely to result in changes in the lyrics.

Since those stations have not been receptive to the idea that they lyrics are derogatory and offensive, perhaps a boycott should be arranged outside those stations? Will they get the message then? Where's Jackson and Sharpton to arrange that? If those two were really concerned about the language and not about promoting their own self image, they'd take those within their own community to task for the offensive language used and spread by their own. Sadly, they tend to focus on the other.

This is just one of the many reasons I considered the firing of Imus to be wrong. It was a gross overreaction to Imus's comments. The suspension was more than sufficient to get the message across that his comments went over the line. The Rutgers team accepted the apology and the coach is in a forgiving mood, which doesn't quite jibe with the CBS reaction, which was to fire him.

A Day Later And Many Dollars Short

The fallout from the North Carolina Attorney General's report on the Duke case continues to reach far and wide. Still, Mike Nifong has been silent on the report, as has the accuser (and she's not going to face charges for her part in this mess).

Some people, like John Podhoretz are naming her and are calling her out. He thinks public shaming is in order, in addition to the possibility of criminal charges, though he notes that AG Cooper has already noted that no such charges will be forthcoming.

Meanwhile, two people who were quite vocal about the Duke non-rape case, Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, have also been quiet about the turn of events and complete exoneration of the trio. Where are their apologies? They put their considerable energies into defending the accuser even as her story was coming apart at the seams.

Guess who's asking that question. Don Imus. Yes, that Don Imus who's busy losing his simulcast operation and is expecting to be fired by CBS at any time.

It's a good question, but why is it up to Imus to ask that question in defense of his own indefensible statements about the Rutgers lady's basketball team? Why haven't other media outlets and journalists asked that question? After all, Sharpton and Jackson have made quite a few inflammatory and derogatory statements over the years and have not been held accountable for their actions, and yet they want to go on a witchhunt.

Here's Sharpton today:

'It is our feeling that this is only the beginning. We must have a broad discussion on what is permitted and not permitted in terms the airwaves...

So, it's a broad discussion that Sharpton wants. He has no problem demanding Imus be fired, but when it comes to the much larger issue of misogynistic statements and derogatory comments against women and minorities by others in the media and entertainment field, he's looking to have a discussion? Where are the demands to fire those involved in the creation, production, and distribution of music that is derogatory of women and minorities?

Who is Sharpton to demand such things? Who is Sharpton to pass judgment on what others say.

Editor and Publisher has a long list of losers and possible winners in the Duke case. The media didn't distinguish itself over the case either, choosing to sensationalize the racial aspects of the case and ignored the clear problems with the case from the outset. There were several in the media and online who didn't succumb to the sensationalism and instead engaged in investigative journalism including the late Ed Bradley, whose piece on 60 Minutes showed the case for the farce that it was.

The calls to disbar Nifong have been growing. Well, join the club. Anyone who has been following this case for months knows by now that Nifong's actions were indefensible and the withholding of exculpatory evidence is one of the biggest no-nos in the criminal justice system.

UPDATE:
Durham DA Mike Nifong has issued a statement. He's apologizing, though the damage has been done by his abject failures and compounding error on error:

The local prosecutor who charged three Duke lacrosse players with raping a stripper apologized to the athletes Thursday, acknowledging that the North Carolina attorney general's decision to drop the case was correct.

"To the extent that I made judgments that ultimately proved to be incorrect, I apologize to the three students that were wrongly accused," Durham County District Attorney Mike Nifong said in a statement.

While we're on the subject of apologies, where's one from the NYT for their biased coverage?