Jack & Jill Politics

I’m sure you’ve all heard of Don Imus’ most recent case of foot-in-mouth disease. Seems Imus has a sweet spot for black athletes. The latest controversy involves comments Imus made about Dallas Cowboys cornerback, Adam “Pacman” Jones. ESPN covered the story, here.

The controversy came Monday when word broke that the troubled cornerback wished to officially drop his nickname, “Pacman,” in hopes for a fresh start. Anyone familiar with the NFL knows that Jones has been the poster-boy for everything wrong with the league for the past couple of years. His career of unquestioned talent has been spoiled by numerous arrests, suspension and multiple encounters with the league commissioner stemming from a shooting that took place at a strip club last year.

Suffice it to say, Jones always keeps the media on its toes. So, after hearing a quick rundown of the player’s rapsheet, old Imus couldn’t help but perform his journalistic duty by asking the most important question:

Imus: “What color is he?”

Answer: “He’s African-American.”

Response: “Well, there you go. Now we know.”

Now how’s that for consistency? Slightly more than a year since calling the Rutgers Women’s Basketball team, “nappy-headed hos,” good ole’ Imus is back like clockwork for another foray into black stereotypes. And doesn’t the media just love a repeat offender like Imus. It’s simple to follow and anything involving race is ratings gold.

For what it’s worth, Imus issued a clarification. . .

via Reuters:

“Obviously I already knew what color [Jones] was. The point was to make a sarcastic point. . . What people should be outraged about is they arrest blacks for no reason . . . There’s no reason to arrest this kid six times, maybe he did something once, but I mean everybody does something once.”

Do you buy that excuse? Me neither.

Of course, people are outraged. And why shouldn’t they? As one sports commentator said this morning, given his less-than-stellar career in race and gender relations, Don Imus lost the benefit of the doubt a long time ago.

Undoubtedly, many of us hear Imus’ comment and detect an implied “duh” quality that conveys a familiar, “well, what do you expect from a nigger” type of sentiment.

This does, however, bring a few questions to mind . . .

Are we surprised by this? Why should we be surprised by this? And why am I not inspired to join the next round of protest that may come as a result of Imus’ most recent comments?

I pose this open question . . .

Are we missing a larger opportunity whenever we’re confronted with a situation like this? How much can we expect to gain by trying to shame white corporate institutions into taking action on behalf of black interests?

Please note: This is not the end of this post. I invite you to read the second part of this post over at Operation Reach B.L.A.C.K., here: Imus and the Dependency of Reactionary Politics.