Rush Limbaugh under attack for Barack Obama parody song

[RockLacrosse20]

Source: AP

The former talk radio host Don Imus recently made racist remarks about the Rutgers women's basketball team on his radio show, he lost his job. Now, some are wondering if radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh has also gone too far, NBC5 reported on Monday.

Weeks before Imus controversy, Limbaugh began airing a song about Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, who is running for the Democratic nomination for president. The song, a parody of the folk song "Puff The Magic Dragon," contains the line, "Barack, The Magic Negro." Some have begun to wonder if Limbaugh has been getting a free pass. "It's insulting," said Michael Harrison, publishers of Talkers Magazine. "It's in bad taste, but it's legitimate political satire."

The voice on the song is a white political satirist imitating civil rights activist Rev. Al Sharpton.
"This is basically the radio equivalent of a black face minstrel show," said Paul Waldman of Media Matters for America. "You know, going back to 'Amos and Andy' and all of those kinds of racist shows." Media watchdogs said there was no hue and cry to stop Limbaugh because he speaks to a niche audience who either expects this or was willing to let him slide, and that his target in this case is a public figure, not a college women's basketball team. Obama said he doesn't listen to Limbaugh, but said being targeted is part of being a politician. In his broadcasts, Limbaugh suggest that the song is a parody based on a newspaper column about Obama written by journalist David Ehrenstein.

"The 'magic negro,'" was chiefly a term used when talking about films, in which you'd have black characters who would suddenly come out of nowhere and come to the rescue of white characters," Ehrenstein said. "I was just simply trying to get a conversation going. How it's gone is another question."
Waldman said Limbaugh has no excuse. "He's trying to get himself off the hook by saying, 'Oh, it was somebody else who did it,'" Waldman said.

Read more: http://www.nbc5.com/news/13361710/detail.html?rss=chi&psp=news

---

OK now DO NOT get me wrong. I believe this song is racist, biggoted, and typical of Rush Limbaugh's two bit view of the world. However, I believe in free speech, and strongly oppose the firing of Don Imus for comments he's always made, which did not advocate violence or discrimination or use the N-word, and I believe Opie and Anthony, who are on PRIVATE SATELLITE RADIO did not deserve their suspension. We have a first amendment, and it should protect ALL Americans, who are increasingly attacked by the government as unpatriotic if they carry any dissent, and all americans private lives can now be searched by the NSA. I am against liberals being suppressed of their free speech, and so am I against conservative's rights being infringed. Rush Limbaugh, while he deserves the be reprimanded and fined by the radio station, does not deserve to be fired over this song. The song does not advocate violence or outright discrimination. I believe that as EVERYTHING Limabugh says is bullshit, he has a right to free speech, as do us liberals. If conservative things or non-liberal things such as Imus's individual comments lead to firings, what will prevent people from making liberals on radio lose their jobs for comments which some may find offensive? We must protect free speech, and as I will not protest if they do fire Limbaugh, I cannot say I support the idea to fire him over these comments. Not to mention the fire he gives liberals as well, and if we are going to have a GOP radio enemy, at least have a fat ass dope who can easily be countered.

[liberal N proud]

1. FINALLY

Will they now take that fat bigot off the air? PLEASE!!!

[wordpix]

7. maybe Limpballs will go off when we stop consuming his advertisers' products

That's one way to get their attention. Who advertises on asshole's show? I rarely listen to the idiot, myself.

[MLFerrell]

40. Select Comfort mattresses...

Advertises on EVERY Rightist propaganda outlet, as far as radio is concerned, anyway.

Aside from that, it varies from snake oil cancer cures to direct marketing scams. Take your pick.

[liberaldemocrat7]

48. and perhaps the Republicans in congress will capitulate to our legislative demands

when we stop buying GOP contributors products.

Go here http://www.dmocrats.org and here http://medicare.dmocrats.org and here http://endthewar.dmocrats.org

[gatorboy]

39. Well THAT took long enough...

How long has this story been out there. Almost a month?

[Clark2008]

52. Two - almost THREE months.

He first played it in March.

[alcibiades_mystery]

2. Please demonstrate how any of the cases you mentioned

constitute an abridgment of the right to free speech.

Thank you.

[RockLacrosse20]

8. where to start???

Don Imus, number one. OK so he said "nappy headed hoes" OK is that offensive, yes, is that threatening violence or saying they should not be givin jobs, no. He was referring to their tattoos which is why he was making fun of them in the first place, and white people can have nappy hair too. And the Bball team in not an all black, black-exclusive club. He did not say "the n-words are nappy headed hoes" or "the black girls". Then, Opie and Anthony, who got suspended for foul language. If these firings keep happening, whats to stop public outrage from happening with more important things, like if they start taking liberals off for calling Bush and GOPers terrorists, with the excuse its offensive the American governments, or taking us off air for complaining bout conservatives by calling us traitors? Or when we make fun of southerners, saying were biggoted? I believe in single, not double standards in most situations. This is no exception.

[tabasco]

13. The First Amendment is only implicated when the GOVERNMENT suppresses free speech.

Why is this so difficult to understand?

"Free speech" does not guarantee you the right to say stupid shit without repercussions from the public.

[alcibiades_mystery]

14. None of those involve government action

They are, therefore, not infringements on legal rights to speak.

If I'm your boss, and you call me an asshole, I don't have to keep you around. I can fire you.

If the police come in and arrest you, and throw you in prison, then your "rights" will have been violated. If I merely fire you, then your rights will not have been violated. I will have merely exercised my own right to select my company.

Your ideas are confused. You make no distinction between free speech as a legally enshrined protection, and speech without consequences, which you seem to desire. Speech without ANY consequences is not protected. Speech without legal (which is to state, state-enforced) consequences IS protected.

None of your cases involved any government action of any kind, so all you managed to demonstrate is that capitalists don't like having employees who reduce their customer-base.

Congratulations: you just launched a significant critique of contemporary capitalism. :rofl:

[RockLacrosse20]

16. Phil Donoghue

If i remember correctly, when MSNBC fired Phil Donaghue in 2003, we were angry, calling it a suppression of free speech, which it truly was, because he was criticizing the Bush administration, and while he had the HIGHEST MSNBC ratings, MSNBC fired him claiming he had the lowest. He did not advocate violence, and advocating the abridgement of free speech, even if not the official government, is as bad as abridging it. Which was advocated by Sharpton and Jackson with Imus and Opie and Anthony. FACE IT, everyone I talked to, including liberals and conservatives sided with Imus, the only losers against him really were Sharpton and Jackson.

[triguy46]

19. As most eloquently pointed out previously

The first amendment deals with governmental restriction of speech. Not network decisions that are good, bad or indifferent.

[Mike Daniels]

18. Neither did stations removing the Dixie Chicks from the air

but that didn't stop DU'ers and other liberal boards from screaming 1st Amendment violations.

It's amazing how it's a "free speech" issue, even when it's not, when it's your (not your specifically) side being silenced by commericial properties but not in the other case.

[triguy46]

20. The old "depends on whose ox is being gored" saying is true.

In this case, I believe that the observation is correct. There is much of DU that is of "our side" vs. "their side." That said, regardless of past action, regardless of the offensiveness of the speech and whether the Imus cancellation was knee jerk, the 1st amendment does not assure one of media access. Lets not confuse market decisions, made by people who are driven by profit motive, with either free speech, censorship.

[tabasco]

24. As I recall, there were DU'ers making the same corrections re: "free speech."

Your recollection may be different. It does not change the law, however.

[alcibiades_mystery]

25. Anyone who screamed "First Amendment Violation"

about the Dixie Chicks doesn't understand the First Amendment.

What happened to the Dixie Chicks, or Don Imus, has nothing to do with the first amendment.

[RockLacrosse20]

28. DITTO

EXACTLY!

[sandnsea]

33. No, not exactly at all

Nobody should ever be taken off the air for criticizing the POLICIES of an elected official, especially the President. The Chicks was completely different than Rush's racist rantings.

[RockLacrosse20]

34. ur missing his point

what he was saying was that when the dixie chicks got in trouble from sponsors and non government entities, us liberals cried "free speech" against those who criticized the Chicks, even tho it wasn't government. So we cannot have a double standard for Imus, Opie and Anthony, and, yes, even Rush Limbuagh

[sandnsea]

35. Dispense with "us liberals"

First of all. It's slightly conspicuous.

And no, I'm not missing the point. You guys are WRONG. See? The Dixie Chicks were criticizing a GOVERNMENT policy, that's why it WAS free speech. Imus and Limbaugh were simply being racist pigs. It's really a clear and stark difference, except for those who thrive on hate speech.

[alcibiades_mystery]

37. I utterly disagree

It was not a free speech issue for the Dixie Chicks either.

[alcibiades_mystery]

36. No, "us liberals" did not cry "free speech"

At least this one didn't.

It has nothing to do with free speech as a Constitutional issue.

It is a debate in the public sphere. That's all it was. The DC said X, the stations did Y, and people disagreed with the stations' actions. That's not a free speech issue.

so stop babbling incoherently about double standards.

[LostinVA]

68. Ah, "Ditto," eh?

I didn't need the clue, you know.

[sandnsea]

32. That was against government specifically

Not just random racist rantings. Big difference.

[Toots]

50. Yes there are ignorant people on both sides of fence but it doesn't alter the facts

This has absolutely nothing to do with any abridgment of free speech. NOTHING. Neither did the Dixie Chicks or Donohue..

[rasputin1952]

42. But, in this case...

"f I'm your boss, and you call me an asshole, I don't have to keep you around. I can fire you."

Wht if you ARE an asshole? Someone points it out, and while youo can fire him, you're still an asshole...:shrug:

caveat: this is hypothetical, I don't think you're an asshole...:D

[MH1]

3. Welcome to DU!

I agree with you about free speech, btw. Much as I detest Limbaugh.

I think the line should be when speech crosses into advocating violence or supporting violent acts against a group. I don't know everything Limbaugh said about Obama so I don't know whether he crossed that line. Imus definitely didn't.

[MissWaverly]

4. I thought it highly offensive including the Sharpton imitation

they could not even do a parody w/o hiding behind someone else, how is that free speech, I thought of it as a dirty smear,
similar to the tactics used against Mr. Ford in TN.

[terip64]

5. Imus got fired because he became a liablitiy and hopefully Limbaugh will too.n/t

[AlCzervik]

6. Imus still has free speech, he's welcome to go to any street and shout

his comments all day long, CBS canned him, that was there choice.

[gobblechops]

9. Imus wasn't Fired

because he used his right to free speech he was fired cause the advertisers did not want to be in league with a bigot,rush's advertisers don't care about his racist remarks or offensive language nor do his listeners cause he says what they think.its about money i consider it my right to free speech to tell advertisers i will not buy there products cause they support bigots.


In america you have the right to free speech but you have to live with the reaction to it.

[RockLacrosse20]

15. yea but who's reaction?

but why did the media get in on it and magnify a benign stupid comment? which led to his firing, because a bunch of talking heads scum like Sharpton, a racist again Mormons and Jews, and Jackson, another anti-semite said so? Remember when Shaprton called Jews "diamond dealers" in 1991 after that boy was accidentally hit by an ambulance? Or when he insulted Mitt Romneys relgion by implying he didn't believe in God because hes a Mormon? How bout "heimi town" which was Jackson's name for NYC in 1984? Why didn't anyone fire them from anything? As a liberal, i must support free speech for ALL, not those solely I agree with, which is what Conservatives do constantly.

[gobblechops]

21. Thats life

its not fair,not everyone is punished equally,the media does that all time focuses on one story and ignores the other no ones freedom of speech is being squelched though we are all free to say as we want but i am also free to disagree with you,no one is being fired over there comments they are being fired cause the comments are not supported by there employers.

I can go in my job tomorrow and tell everyone that i talk to what we sell is crap that does not mean my employer is forced to keep me cause I have freedom of speech.when they fire me i still have the right to say there product is crap.

[bunkerbuster1]

22. Why didn't anyone fire Sharpton and Jackson?

Because they're essentially self-employed.

Imus wasn't.

[RockLacrosse20]

23. his radio show???

why hasn't he been fired for bad things hes said by his radio station??? Imus was. And Sharpton does not own the radio company which broadcasts him, so NO he is not self employed

[bunkerbuster1]

46. I believe the comments you cite

were not uttered on his radio show, but I could be wrong.

(I know very little about Sharpton's show, to be honest, was barely aware he even had one.)

[RockLacrosse20]

61. yea but the stations still home to a racist

so why would they keep him them?

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

53. Sharpton's a racist against mormons and jews?

:rofl:

Haven't you got to go back to class?

[RockLacrosse20]

65. Crown Heights Riots? "Diamond Dealers"?

Remember the Crown Heights riots in 1991? When the black kid was killed by an ambulance in a Jewish hood and Sharpton blamed "diamond dealers"?? And haven't u been following anything in the news recenetly http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/05/09/romney.sharpton.ap/index.html Sharpton is a racist and a bigot as bad as he criticizes others. YOU my friend need to go back to the newspapers.

[gorbal]

10. That's disgusting!!!

Now I just need someone to e-mail. How about Al Sharpton?

[Kagemusha]

11. I'm not so sure about that "weeks before the Imus controversy" part.

Is that weeks before Imus made his remarks or weeks before it got him fired?...

But oh well. That's nitpicking.

[LynnTheDem]

12. That druggie is still alive?

Talk about "irrelevant".

[triguy46]

17. Um, perhaps some clarification is needed.

Free speech is free speech, but commercial speech exists at the whim of those who pay the bills. You should not confuse Imus' firing, or the blessed possibility of limpballs being shut down to mean their free speech is infringed. They can stand on the corner of the street and talk till the cows come home. By the same token, my free speech is not infringed since no one will carry my rants on a radio show. Those that run the stations can allow or not, (within the limitations of licensure) theirs or anyone's speech, but if they choose not to, it is a market driven decision, not a first amendment infringement.
The first amendment does not guarantee you a radio show.

[DavidMS]

26. I'm with you

If we contact his advertisers and ask if they really want to be seen as supporting Rush's backwards positions on race, sex and class, and they are fine with it thats their problem. I suspect many of them will stop advertising and that would get him pulled off the air.

Of course then we wouldn't have him to mock (but then again would eliminate a major point-source of Electro-Magnetic Frequency pollution).

[RockLacrosse20]

27. the encouragement of it

the firing was not due to true public outrage, as polls will show, and casual convos with libs and cons will show. IT was due to 2 scummy talkin heads in the media

[Malikshah]

29. Enough with Limbaugh and Imus comparisons-- Imus was canned for other issues

From what's been said, reported, alluded to by folks including Keith O -- Imus and Co. had a nasty reputation of being a bunch of horndog louts out MSNBC and other environs. The "crime" in my book was that they, like O'Reilly, were allowed to remain at their jobs even with this alleged behavior (i.e. I don't have affidavits so I use alleged) The Imus remarks were most likely going to be allowed to continue-- hell, he and his little group of pinky-dicked asswipes had done this sort of things numerous times... what it took in this case, however, was the concerted efforts of NBC workers, the public, and media attention.

The whole Free Speech game will just get people's knickers in a twist. It's the sexual harassment that got Imus the boot, and rightly so. Now..should he have been canned for his statements? Yes. Because of Free Speech issues? No. Because he was a hateful bigoted asswipe? Yep. Was he canned for any of these reasons? No.

He was fired because he finally became too much of a financial liability for CBS and GE

Will Rush be canned for his hateful speech? Nope. Not until he's a financial liability. Should he be fired? Of course; he provides nothing of value to the discourse and only serves to incite people.

Should O'Reilly go? Oh, yes. Even moreso.

[David__77]

30. What does getting fired or not have to do with "free speech?"

Limbaugh would have free speech even if he were drummed off the stations he is currently heard on. Let him stand on the street corner. Even then, I would prefer he be confronted and made to explain himself but still, his speech would be free from legal penalty.

[alcibiades_mystery]

38. Nothing

[agincourt]

31. If your government is bought, sold and controlled

by corporations in bed with the president, then firing people for saying the truth is a violation of the first amendment. As a matter of fact our whole media is a violation of the first ammendment for it's mostly a propaganda mill of the rich with little influence of the American people.

[Bronyraurus]

41. The song is not racist

Is anyone willing to admit that?

[Berry Cool]

47. Of course it's racist.

It implies there is an "authentic" way that African Americans talk and look and act, and that Barack Obama doesn't hold to it, and that Al Sharpton objects to him because of this.

And it's being sung by a WHITE GUY attempting to sound like an "authentic" African American.

And that makes all the difference.

[bennie]

51. No, it's not racist. It's making fun of racists.

The song is basically pointing out that certain media outlets are enamored of Sen. Obama because he is an African-American, as opposed to being enamored of him based on his ideas. It's making fun of Rev. Sharpton's jealousy of Sen. Obama. It's making fun of Sen Biden's well-intentioned though poorly expressed praise of Sen. Obama.
The song never takes a jab at Sen. Obama, and lets face it, if Rush was going to attack Sen. Obama, he would have been very pointed and clear about it. Subtlety is not Mr. Limbaugh's strong suit.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

54. Sharpton's jealous of Obama?

link?

[bennie]

55. Sharpton denies it, but many media outlets are pointing to it.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2007/03/19/al_sharpton/index_np.html

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

56. What's that got to do with Sharpton being jealous of Obama?

Try a little harder.

[rasputin1952]

43. Screw RL, this is one more thing that comes right up to the

line, and he knows it. What got me was when he threatend to take on anyone who tried to make a case out of this. It was a threat, and the epitome of hypocrisy. If he can air that parody, why can't people call him on it, is that not Free Speech as well?

He's sounded like he was a bit too close to defensive on this one. As for things he's said that are REALLY OTT, he once called for Clinton's assassination, I heard him on the air about 7 years ago..."I wish someone would just take him out". He should have been locked up for that little gem...:grr:

[Swamp Rat]

44. Welcome to DU!

:hi:

[Judi Lynn]

45. Mr. LaCrosse, here's a clip from a former Limbaugh listener, "The Reluctant Redneck."

He explains how Limbaugh's mocking Michael J. Fox lost him a longtime listener. I found it by accident, looking for a video of Rush aping Mr. Fox's illness, like the asshole he has always been:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B03ZOOMsgws

(To Swamp Rat, that clip of Rush Limbaugh mocking Michael Fox really cries out to be completely green!)

[a kennedy]

49. Hello???? and finally.

:puke:

[ItNerd4life]

57. Um, The song is making fun of liberal racists

according to Limbaugh. All the words in the song have been said by reporters who claim to be Democrats and by people like Sharpton.

I'm not saying Limbaugh isn't racist, but please get facts straight before you use this song as a reference. The song parodies everything that has been said by people who claim to be Liberals.

The words have all been in newspapers and on t.v.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

58. Let's take a look, shall we?

Barack the Magic Negro lives in D.C.
The L.A. Times they called him that
cause he's not authentic like me.

Yeah the guy from the L.A. paper
said he made guilty whites feel good
they'll vote for him and not for me
cause hes not from da hood.

See, real black men like snoop dogg
or me or Farrakhan
have talked the talk and walked the walk
not come and laid and won (not sure about this line).

Barack the Magic Negro lives in D.C.
The L.A. Times they called him that
cause he's not authentic like me
cause hes black but not authentically.

Barack the Magic Negro lives in D.C.
The L.A. Times they called him that
cause he's not authentic like me
cause hes black but not authentically.

Some say Barack's articulate
and bright and new and clean
the media sure love this guy
a white interloper's dream.

But when you vote for president
watch out and don't be fooled
don't vote the magic negro in
cause...

Now, which particular parts are from these so called "liberal racists," hmm?

[Dave From Canada]

59. I would say, if anything, it makes a distinction between the old black leadership and

the new black leadership. It seems like more of a slam against Sharpton and Jackson, and also Biden, with the articulate and clean stuff.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

60. Why would anyone want to slam black leadership?

Isn't that intrinsically racist?

[Dave From Canada]

64. Why is it racist to slam black leadership? Because they're black their immune to

criticism? Whether you like it or agree with it, it does make a political point. Some old-school black leaders don't feel Obama is worthy of all the attention and stature because he hasn't been fighting the battles like other leaders have (Sharpton, Jackson). I'm not saying that's right, but it has been something that's been out there.

I'm not saying that Limbaugh hasn't participated in racist dialogue in the past. His halfrican american stuff is a perfect example. I think that's actual racism. I don't think this satirical song is though.

[Adenoid_Hynkel]

63. So when Rush does his equally offensive Mandela "impression" who is that making fun of?

As soon as Limbuagh saw that ridiculous LA Times editorial, he probably wet his pants with glee that he could use it as cover to do this song.

[Adenoid_Hynkel]

62. THE FIRST AMENDMENT DOES NOT GUARANTEE YOU A RADIO SHOW!

Why can't people understand that? It's a simple concept.
If Rush wants to do racist "impressions" and sing bigoted songs in his own time, he's free to.
However, if advertisers and stations and the public decide they don't want it on the air, they have every right to get rid of it.
Furthermore, there was a time when broadcast stations, due to the limited availability of the public airwaves, were required to act in the public interest. This was an Americ an tradition, until rightwing radicals in the Reagan FCC changed the way the approach in the airwaves are regualted.
How is singing this racist bile operating the public interest?

[BlooInBloo]

66. It'll go nowhere. White folks feel like they've fulfilled their obligation....

... in getting rid of one racist. They're just waiting for people to go for more, so they can be called "oversensitive" or "pc" or something similarly racist.

[Stupified]

67. Bill O'Reilly's show makes rape funny...

Check this link that NO ONE wants to talk about:

http://www.youtube.com:80/watch?v=sRbH0hpTiLs

So why would we expect anything but this kind of thing from Rush?