http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-CCS7kTLUZM&mode=related&search=

you don’t have be offended by what person says you know who you are that’s what basketball team should’ve thought about before acting, like that old saying which is true. sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me. that what they should’ve done just let it slide.

So what does “happy to be nappy” really mean? Enlighten us, please.

funny, i have a different recollection of history than you do. when howard was originally fired from wnbc, imus was uncharacteristically silent (unlike his colleagues on wfan in regards his termination)

when the fcc was coming down hard on stern, i really dont recall imus saying anything….and i was in nyc at the time

but if you have a link to those comments it would be appreciated

imus became a liability to nbc and cbs when major advertisers pulled their spots…and they werent coming back

this was a money decision, not one based on morality

Two aging men who never had a legitimate job in their lives!

Imus was supporting Stern all the way on that, even though they were bitter enemies.

(I feel like most of the people supporting the firing never listened to or watched the show.)

I don’t even know anymore what it means. Is it slang for “whore”? It used to mean that, but it certainly doesn’t seem to be used in that sense anymore. What do you think it means?

(Once again, dear, please lose the caps. Hit the caps lock button.)

there is no free speech on the public airwaves…that is why they are regulated

where was imus when howard stern was getting fined millions, or having stations pull his programing?

and trust me…it wasnt imus’ original on air comments that got him fired…it was his bs apologies, and his non contrite appearance with that hack sharpton

come on…when he finally became aware of his termination, he couldnt stop ragging on sharpton

bitter old men dont belong on the radio…they belong on some park bench feeding the pigeons

Either way and from any mouth, I abhor the word ho.

Holding the value of trying to do least harm, rather than being purposely reckless with words and actions, is an ancient ideal; one that most leaders we hallow, strive toward. Reason? To say or act recklessly or without thought, often sets off conflagrations with others. We can all see how war saps creative life, undercuts innovations and thieves all time and resource, and instead leaves us with anger and ashes, which after the first burn-off are pretty much interchangeable. I’d say your principle is “Do unto others…” Personally, though most of us are imperfect at it, I think it’s a fine goal.

also Holly, thank you for posting this topic and again, just my 2 cents worth about that matter: I think it would elucidate a lot for many of us if we could know exactly how the corporate decision was made to withdraw or break what likely would have been a written legal document spelling out Mr. Imus’ two-week probation. Can such a serious a priori agreement really just be set aside like that…

This sudden about-face in what seemed an executed probationary process, leads me to wonder if irony and fact are one: that the very reason Mr. Imus was hired, may also be the real reason he was let go. If ‘the big M’ was the bottom line in hiring him, and if ‘the big M’ was subsequently threatened… then letting Mr. Imus go may have had little to do with corporate’s liking or disliking of the timbre or aim of his speech.
dr. e