I think people are confused about whether Michael Richards is Jewish because he played a Jewish character on ‘Seinfeld’ — but his anti-Jewish rants (in which he blamed Jews for killing Christ), in addition to comments by those who know him personally at other sites, would seem to indicate he was raised Catholic.

The question of alcohol or drug abuse has not been broached here in depth, but it certainly comes to mind when reading a transcript of his rambling, incoherent so-called apology on the David Letterman show. His references to Hurricane Katrina and to some sort of approaching black-white conflict are incomprehensible and seem mentally disturbed.

Finally, i think it very sad that he is a Freemason, for the Masonic organization generally upholds the tents of tolerance and brotherhood. I think Michael Richards owes his fellow Masons an apology for casting his own darkness upong the lodges n which he is a member.

The Moderate Voice is certainly not “moderate”, but writing BS.

If you don’t believe me about David Duke, then do what you should have been doing all along and check everything out for yourself–including what he has to say. Go to his website at davidduke dot com, look for November 24, and you will see a transcript of his commentary on “David Duke on Kramer, the “N Wordâ€?, Racism, Violence, Israel and Palestinians”

There are all kinds of situations where the same term can be offensive or not depending on the context and WHO is using it. It’s not something limited to race. Most people understand this and act accordingly.

The term “nigger” is an historically loaded word that has a different meaning coming from a white person’s mouth than it has from a black person’s, – even if the meaning is unintentional. It’s as simple as that.”

The same word uttered from different mouths should have the same meaning. To apply two different meanings to the same word just because one speakers skin is of a different color is a form of racism in itself.

In emotional work there is a concept of ‘gapping’, where emotions denied for a long time are suddenly triggered into expression with the person expressing them not being in control or even conscious of what is going on – the gap here is between what one is conscious of and what has been supressed and made unconscious.

“It’s not funny, that’s why you’re a reject, never had no shows, never had no movies, ‘Seinfeld’ that’s it.” – I think this bit, posted by two shoes earlier, may be a more accurate reflection of what made Richards snap. . . what if this is what he has been feeling about himself and his career for a long time? . . . if he has been denying these feelings and if self-hatred finally burst out – it would express in a way that would hurt him more than the person he was ranting at. . . and this seems to me what has happened. . . the resulting reaction to his rant may be a mirror of both what made him snap and of the intent behind the original heckling. . . There is another aspect of gapping relevant here, in that the longer an emotion is suppressed the more it deteriorates into panic or rage – so the more veteran performer would actually not be better prepared for making a measured response once he gaps. . .

The gapping concept could also support the theory that Richards is a closet racist, but looking at the larger context – - – I see a performer who has struggled with self-doubt for a long time and finally lost control over the emotions he’s tried to suppress. . .

- – -

Comparing Richards to Milton Berle seems unfair to me. . . I see current comedians working much, much closer to the edge of improvisation than the comedians of Berle’s era. . .to improvise, to take advantage of opportunities a performer has to open himself, to allow himself to be vulnerable – and that in turn makes a heckler’s attack cut that much more deeply. . .

Anyone who heckles a comedian has to accept a risk of public embarassemnt. . . on balance I feel more compassion for Richards here than a black man who made the first choice of stepping into uncertain territory. . .

The mistake Richards made was in trying to top himself by repeating the N word. It is too racially charged and dividing. Again, the audience overreacted – it’s a comedy club not a political rally. It is either funny or not.

Despite his outburst, I still stand behind Michael Richards and his antics from UHF. Perhaps the hecklers should have used the money they saved from buying cheap seats to research the movies Richards has been in.

One thing remains certain: don’t heckle a comedian on stage unless you’ve got a personality death wish. To them, nothing (and I mean NOTHING) is sacred. Just ask Lisa Lampanelli.

There are all kinds of situations where the same term can be offensive or not depending on the context and WHO is using it. It’s not something limited to race. Most people understand this and act accordingly.

The term “nigger” is an historically loaded word that has a different meaning coming from a white person’s mouth than it has from a black person’s, – even if the meaning is unintentional. It’s as simple as that.

Blacks mocking white culture is different because white culture is dominant here.

This is why WASP jokes are fair game, as is mocking Christianity, while other religions is not. Personally, I think everything, from myself to you, to anyone else, to any group, instritution, etc., is open to humorous gibes.

Unfortunately, most people are not that open and mature, and they use their taking offense as a weapon. Just look at South Park’s creators. They at least admitted they make fun of Jesus and not Mohammed cuz they don’t want Moslem nuts blowing them up.

Most ethnic humor is of the ‘how many X does it take to screw in a lightbulb’ variety, therefore not really funny. But, most good humor will offend somebody. The point is, though, when a Chappelle makes fun of Whitey, it’s an act.

Richards seems to have alowed his real ugliness shine.

Namely, that Richards was never a “COMIC” but was, rather, a “COMIC ACTOR”.

By this I mean, he was good at physical comedy and at interpreting written lines…but verbal stand-up was totally alien to him. I have seen this referenced elsewhere, but did not think about it until reading Donnie. Richards has evidently been trying to rebuild his career through stand-up comedy, but it may be argued he simply did not have the experience or comic talent to deal with hecklers without internalizing their criticism and exploding in rage.

Not to justify it, but to explain the bizarreness of the incident. See below:

“Comedian George Lopez told Los Angeles television station KTLA that he thought Richards’ lack of stand-up experience may have been a factor.

“The question is you have an actor who is trying to be a comedian who doesn’t know what to do when an audience is disruptive,” Lopez said. “He’s an actor whose show has been off the air, he shouldn’t ever be on a stand-up gig.”

“…many an evening I’ve set and watched black comedians use the “N” word as well as others, such as “HONKEY” “CRACKER” “WHITE BOY” “WHITE TRASH” and so on and so forth.Quite a double standard….”

He is making an interesting point here. Clearly, there is a double standard. This may be based, at least in part, upon the perception of Whites being dominant in society and therefore less vulnerable to racial attacks.

We see variations of this double standard throughout our culture. For example, at the university I attended the university’s bylaws on Racism officially defined it as a “practice where White individuals or groups denigrate, by word or inference…”.

Interestingly, the university’s leadership was entirely White, and my Black friends at the university considered the whole policy stupid given that they felt particularly denigrated by the university’s large Asian population who — under the university’s official policy — could never be accused of racism as only Whites could be “racist”.

While the above is OT, I just cite it to note that I think Sardonicus does have a broader point here that you may have overlooked.

Donnie D: Sex and race are two diff standards. As for Polanski, even the girl he had sex with admitted there was no force. Is thsi right? No. Should Polanski be hounded thirty years later? No. Consider all the female teachers who have seduced male students. We give a thumbs up to the boys for nailing them. Are they as guilty as Polanski? Yes. Do we rage about it? No. Why?

As for Allen, he’s a perv, but ultimately, he and Polanski will be judge for their films, and Richards by his laughter making ability.

This racial burst is a smudge, like a permanent pimple on his face, but that’s all.