A Word Can Get You Fired?

If there was any doubt the Thought Police have arrived, one need only consider the case of St. Louis talk show host Dave Lenihan. He was fired this week from his job - and quite possibly may never work in radio again - for the single accidental utterance of a four-letter word. An utterance for which he immediately apologized (as in, in his very next sentence) and has, for all it appears, felt profound remorse.

The word: coon. Granted, it's a highly offensive word that carries nearly nuclear consequences if spoken in any context. Don't get me wrong - I'm not defending Lenihan's use of the word in any way, shape or form. Words mean things, and if you're a talk show host words are your bread and butter. But still, I wonder if the punishment fits the crime.

First, a bit of context. Here's the complete AP article, posted today:

Radio Host Fired for Using Racial Epithet
By CHERYL WITTENAUER
Associated Press Writer

ST. LOUIS — A St. Louis radio station quickly fired a talk show host for uttering a racial epithet as he talked about Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice on his morning show Wednesday.

Dave Lenihan apologized on the air immediately after making what he said was a slip of the tongue. KTRS president and general manager Tim Dorsey agreed the remark was accidental but said it was nonetheless "unacceptable, reprehensible and unforgivable."

Lenihan had been heaping praise on Rice, who has frequently said she aspires to run the NFL one day but has more recently ruled out seeking to replace retiring Commissioner Paul Tagliabue.

"She's been chancellor of Stanford," Lenihan said on the air. "She's got the patent resume of somebody that has serious skill. She loves football. She's African-American, which would kind of be a big coon. A big coon. Oh my God. I am totally, totally, totally, totally, totally sorry for that."

He said he had meant to say "coup" instead of the racial slur.

KTRS listeners soon began calling the station to complain. Twenty minutes after the utterance, Dorsey went on the air to apologize to Rice and KTRS listeners.

"There can be no excuse for what was said," Dorsey said. "Dave Lenihan has been let go. ... There is enough hate. We certainly are not going to fan those flames."

NAACP chapter president Harold Crumpton commended Dorsey for his swift action.

Reached at home, Lenihan said he was still trying to figure out what happened and was drafting a letter of apology to Rice. He said he never uses the slur he uttered and thinks Rice is "a fantastic woman."

Lenihan, formerly a drive-time host at WGNU radio in St. Louis, had been at KTRS for less than two weeks.

"It was my dream job," he said. "Ratings were going well. It kind of stinks."

There are a number of issues at play here. Racial politics. Freedom of speech. Just punishment.

Let's analyze the various reasons how this could have happened:

1. Slip of the tongue. It could have been, as Lenihan claims, a simple slip of the tongue. He had nothing but praise for Rice, and he says he meant to say "coup" (which fits the context), so it may have been a simple, if unfortunate, fumbling of words. In which case he did not mean to utter a racial epithet, consciously or unconsciously, and cannot be accused of racism.

2. Freudian slip. There's no indication that Lenihan had a reputation for making racial remarks, or of being a racist. Obviously, we know nothing about him beyond the news article above, but let's assume it was a Freudian slip, and not a serious attempt at besmirching the Secretary of State. Is there really one among us who hasn't made a Freudian slip? If so, step forward for your medal. We all harbor prejudices, petty thoughts, naughty fantasies, etc. which we keep tightly bottled-up 99% of the time. But we don't act on them. They do not define us. Our rational minds keeps these irrational feelings under control. Who hasn't seen someone passing by and thought, even for a split second, "Fat bitch" or "Ugly bastard" - or even "coon", "honky", "kike" or other, even worse things? What if it Lenihan suffers from a mild case of Turrett's Syndrome? Should he be fired, his career ruined - or should his employer provide treatment through his health insurance?

3. Tasteless joke. Let's assume for a moment that Lenihan meant this as a poorly thought-out, tasteless joke. He sure slipped it in there seamlessly, if that's the case. He's a good actor, so it seems. If it were intentional, certainly Lenihan should be punished by his employer. But fired forever? Does anyone seriously think a black radio host would have been fired, say, for dropping the word "honky" or "ho" or even "nigger" (say, in referring to a black colleague)? Not a chance. I think it's pretty clear there's a double standard here. The fact that the manager fired the guy within 20 minutes, and that the NAACP went out of its way to issue a swift press release praising the action, is an indication of how terrified station manager Tim Dorsey was of a potential lawsuit. Has the NAACP been reduced to heaping praise over ruining a man's career over the single utterance of an impolite word? One would have thought Lenihan was calling for a lynching.

4. Dave Lenihan is an unrepentant racist and he meant exactly what he said. Worst case scenario here. If this is true, he probably should be fired. But there's no evidence that this is the case. The news article gives no indication of a history of problematic behavior. Therefore, it doesn't look like Lenihan is some sort of blithering white supremacist. He has a right to free speech, in any case, but his employer doesn't have to give him a job.

In any case, is it prudent and proper for an employer to fire someone within 20 minutes for the utterance of a single word - any word? No 24 hour cooling off period? No sending him home without pay for a week to get to the bottom of it? Are black Americans so intolerant that they won't cut a white guy a break for a single syllable? Apparently not.

In much of Western Europe, it is against the law to make disparaging remarks against another's race, religion or ethnicity. It is against the law to deny the Holocaust, and they're one newspaper cartoon away from sending people to prison over lampooning Islam.

In America, it is a crime to hate. To think bad thoughts. If I kill another white man in cold blood with a baseball bat I get less prison time than if that man was black. In the absense of evidence that my actions were intended to "send a message" to a certain sector of the population (i.e. a terroristic threat), the identity of my victim means more than my intent.

It might be 22 years late, but 1984 is knocking on our door.

Tim Dorsey says the comment was "unforgivable". Really? UNFORGIVABLE? An offensive four-letter word is UNFORGIVABLE? Please, Mr. Dorsey. Call it like it is: CYA for the radio station; insurance against an NAACP lawsuit.

I'm hoping Condoleezza Rice will step in and ask that Lenihan be given his job back. Surely she's big enough to forgive a little slip-up, even if Dorsey and the NAACP aren't. If Lenihan screws up again, or eventually shows his true colors (forgive the pun), then fire his ass, and good riddance.

Meanwhile, Americans need to get a thicker skin. Kids kill one another these days for "disrespecting" someone. Adults sue at the drop of a hat. Being an adult means laughing in the face of insults and living your life in a way that is impervious to any word, four-letter or otherwise.

I'm disappointed in Lenihan, to say the least, but I think the man is being used as a scapegoat, a pawn in a bigger game that threatens to destroy free speech and free thought in this country. Alas.

Vindication in River City

I'm not much of a fan of rap music, although I bashfully admit to buying a copy of The Beastie Boys' License to Ill way back when, and hitting the dance floor a time or two in my mispent youth for Run DMC's rendition of "Walk This Way". It's not that I don't appreciate some hip hop, but I lost interest completely when gangsta rap really caught on.

Anyway, I've said for years (to rolling eyes all around the room) that the first rap song was "Trouble in River City", from the old musical The Music Man. You know, 1962, Robert Preston in the town square, rappin' away before anybody knew to call it that:

Friends, lemme tell you what I mean.
Ya got one, two, three, four, five, six pockets in a table.
Pockets that mark the diff'rence
Between a gentlemen and a bum,
With a capital "B"...

Anway, last week the Smithsonian held a news conference to announce they were starting a collection of hip hop related artifacts, and several artists were on hand to talk about it. Then none other than Afrika Bambaataa starts talking about the deep roots of hip hop - and mentions "Trouble in River City"! I nearly drove off the road. And although I never heard any rap artist claim The Music Man as an influence, it's interesting how much the song shares thematically with much of today's urban music. It talks about how pool halls are a corrupting influence on the town's youth, ultimately leading to gambling, drinking and worse! Yeah, okay, Preston doesn't threaten to pop a cap in somebody's ass, but maybe they'll get to that in the remake...

Port (In)Security?

Is it Islamophobic to oppose allowing a Middle Eastern country to participate in the management of major US ports? Is it racist?

I find it mildly hilarious that all the people who've been howling against "profiling" should suddenly find religion (pardon the pun) when the Bush administration okays a deal to allow management of operations in a half-dozen major US seaports by a British-based company owned by conglomerate based in the United Arab Emirates. Complicated? Yes. But does this really put the US at risk vis-a-vis terrorism? My understanding is that we're not exactly turning over port security to the Arabs. And it's also true that the UAE has been as cooperative in the War on Terror as any other Muslim country you could name (which, to be fair, isn't saying much).

Still...as friendly as the government of the UAE might be to America and American business, I'll bet they do not enjoy support from their population. Like the Saudi royal family, and like Pakistan's General Pervez Musharraf, the UAE rules over a population that is openly hostile to the ideas of Western civilization, and openly hostile to America in particular. Is there any doubt that if open elections were held in Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and the UAE, that these governments would look something like Iran? Or worse, like Afghanistan during the Taliban?

The UAE lies in the heart of enemy territory, culturally speaking, and is therefore vulnerable to infiltration by Islamofascist elements. Maybe these port contracts won't lead to a nuclear weapon being smuggled into Baltimore, but it's possible that sensitive information about port security and import operations could get into unfriendly hands.

It seems wise to me that the US should not award port-operation contracts to companies based in unstable or unfriendly regions. Is it profiling? Well, yes. Is it racist? No. We are at war with fundamentalist Islam, and until that war is over, we need to do whatever is necessary to secure our borders. We can still trade with UAE and do plenty of business with them without giving them an "in" on port operations. Sure, they'll be disappointed and it might cool relations for a little while. But in the long run the moderate elements in the Middle East know who the real enemy is, and they'll get over it.

You Gotta Fight, for Your Right, to Fa-a-a-a-a-twah!

If a Muslim dies rioting over cartoons, is he rewarded with 72 Jessica Rabbits?

G'Kar Ventures beyond the Rim

Very sad news this week. Actor Andreas Katsulas, best known for his portrayal of Babylon 5's Ambassador G'Kar, has died from lung cancer at the all-too-early age of 59. B5 fans have been struck three terrible blows in just two years: Richard Biggs, who played Dr. Stephen Franklin, died unexpected in 2004 at the age of 44, leaving a wife and young children; and Tim Choate, who made a handful of eminently memorable appearances as the quirky Zathras, was only 50 when he died in a motorcycle accident that same year.

For what it's worth, at the beginning of 2006 I embarked on a personal project to re-watch all of B5, and I was struck at how wonderful Katsulas's work on the show really was. The role of G'Kar offered great challenges, not the least of which was the heavy prosthetics required (those who had never seen Katsulas without his make-up would never have recognized him on the street). But G'Kar was also a magnificent opportunity. B5 creator (and primary writer) J. Michael Straczynski made G'Kar a vivid, realistic character; yet one with Shakespearean proportions. Fans of the show already know that G'Kar began as a gunrunning terrorist in the pilot movie, and by the series' end he had been transformed into a Christ-like religious icon who had to flee into the wilderness of space to escape the cultish adoration of his followers. It was a joy too see Katsulas pull off this transition with such subtlety and aplomb.

And who better to embody G'Kar than the physically imposing, baritone voiced Andreas Katsulas? Critics and fans talk all the time about how this actor or that was born to play a role, but I don't think it's an exaggeration to say that G'Kar wouldn't have been G'Kar - and by extension, B5 wouldn't have been B5 - without Katsulas in that lizard suit. The vicious repartee between G'Kar and arch-nemesis Londo Mollari (played by Peter Jurasik) was absolutely priceless and the stuff of fannish legend.

G'Kar wasn't the only character on the show to get great lines (Straczynski was good about spreading that wealth), but G'Kar was by far the most eloquent and philosophical. I could quote him endlessly, but I'll leave you with one G'Kar-ism that seems appropriate now:

"I believe that when we leave a place a part of it goes with us and part of us remains. Go anywhere in these halls, when it is quiet and just listen. After a while you will hear the echoes of all of our conversations, every thought and word we've exchanged. Long after we are gone, our voices will linger in these walls for as long as this place remains. But I will admit that the part of me that is going will very much miss the part of you that is staying."

Although Andreas has gone, his voice will live on, not just as part of some science fiction show, but in the hearts and memories of the friends and fans who remember him.

Cartoons of the Apocalypse

Okay, maybe I'm a little late chiming in on this whole "cartoons of Mohammed" business, but what can I say? I've been busy.

Unless you've been hiding under a rock, you already know that a Danish newspaper published a handful of cartoons featuring the Prophet Mohammed. Some of them were utterly innocuous (Mohammed depicted as a average-looking Arab leading a camel); some merely satirical (Mohammed shouting down from heaven "Enough already! We've run out of virgins!"); some intentionally inflammatory (Mohammed wearing a turban that looks like a bomb with a lit fuse).
Half a dozen people have DIED in rioting throughout the Muslim world. Several embassies have been torched. Mobs have called for the death of Denmark (Yeah. "Death to Denmark!" Whew. They finally identified the true threat to Islamic dignity.) Unsurprisingly, these same mobs have taken the opportunity to call for the requisite deaths to America and Israel. No news there.

The ostensible reason for the rioting is that Mohammed was DEPICTED AT ALL. Bad enough that he's depicted in supposedly insulting fashion. But "they" say it's taboo for anyone to depict the Prophet at all.

Of course, these cartoons aren't really the issue at all. The issue is the inordinate emphasis placed on male dignity in the Muslim/Arab world. Let's face it, Islam has been in the decline, culturally speaking, for 500 years. They've been choking on the dust of the traditionally Christian (now largely secular) West for quite some time now, and it stings their pride. Now, I'm not going to defend or condemn the course of Western/Islamic relations, but it's pretty clear to me which side is by far in the right on this thing.

The West.

Do Muslims really expect us to take them serious when they riot over CARTOONS? I guess the answer is "yes". They really do expect us to take note that Theo Van Gogh was assassinated over making a documentary. Theo didn't kill anybody. He made a movie that was critical and insulting (so they say) to Islam, and ultimately insulting to Arab pride. And they're not willing to live and let live. They don't answer criticms, or even mockery, with rational discourse. They murder people. You'd think the West would have learned from the experience of Salman Rushdie.

The thing that irks me the most is what pussies the Western media have been over this. Every newspaper and TV newscast in the Western world should have been falling over one another to at least show these cartoons so people will know what the fuss is all about. But they won't, for one simple reason: they're afraid of reprisal from Islamic nutjobs. What irks me second-most is how vacillating our bureaucrats have been. "Oh, we understand your outrage. Those cartoons are disrespectful. But we have free speech. Sorry." Argh! Stop apologizing for being right!

Not that I blame them for being afraid. But if you're afraid, get out of the news biz - and stop running for office. The reason they published photos of "Piss Christ" was that, when push comes to shove, Christians are far more tolerant than Muslims. Christians might outmaneuver you at the voting booth, or at the local school board, but they are far less likely to murder you just because you insult their religion.

To be sure, the Islamic world is showing, more and more with each passing day, that they are THE PROBLEM. Obviously, if an insane person shows that he's willing to murder over the slightest insult to his pride, we have to tread lightly around him. But you don't adjust your behavior - you make him adjust HIS. We're right. They're wrong. We need to stick to our guns on this issue. We have free speech. People are free to say insulting things. But people are also obligated to respond in a way that shows their dignity, not their ass.

We must not kowtow to a backward, superstitious culture that thinks it's okay to murder over an insult; who thinks it's okay to murder for apostasy; who thinks it's okay to suppress women and religious minorities. We must insist on continuing our Western tradition of chaotic free speech; of the marketplace of ideas; of the right to be wrong, or insulting, or just plain thought-provoking. If they have a problem with it, they need to deal with it. And if they can't respond in a rational way, we may have to deal with them.

Testing Testing...

Welcome to the new blog! This replaces the old "Amazing Snider-Blog" at www.scifidimensions.com, and will hopefully make it easier for you to interact with me. Feel free to comment on posts here, or anything you see at scifidimensions.

Now, back to work...