Head Strong: Reviewing June's stupidest comments
6.29.2008
Don Imus says something controversial about a black athlete (again).
A state legislator refuses to support a pro forma proclamation acknowledging a Muslim group. Why? Because they do not worship the legislator's God.
And a senior aide to John McCain muses that an outbreak of terrorism would benefit his candidate.
Uses of the brain and mouth like these can mean only one thing: the Muzzle Meter.
The Muzzle Meter is my standard of measurement for speech with possible political-correctness implications. A high score indicates speech that really is offensive (think Mel Gibson on his drunken anti-Semitic rant in 2006), while a low score means the outrage is unwarranted (as when Sen. Joe Biden called Barack Obama an "articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy").
The scale runs from zero (no harm, no foul) to 10 (muzzling needed). There's no scientific calculation here. It's all gut-based. As Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart once said about pornography: "I know it when I see it . . ."
Don Imus. Last April, when Imus made those infamous comments about the Rutgers women's basketball team on his TV/radio simulcast, I said they were boneheaded and reprehensible, and I thought he deserved the initial suspension he received. But I also gave him the benefit of the doubt as to whether his comments were made with racial animus and said his conduct did not warrant his eventual firing by CBS Radio and MSNBC.
Well, he did it again.
On Monday, Imus (now on ABC Radio Network) and sidekick Warner Wolf were discussing Dallas Cowboys cornerback Adam Jones (the former "Pacman" Jones, although he has asked that that nickname no longer be used). Jones has been arrested six times and is currently suspended by the National Football League. Imus suddenly asked, "What color is he?"
Wolf told him ("African American"), and Imus replied, "There you go. Now we know."
Significantly, Imus offered no immediate explanation for what he'd said. It wasn't until the following morning that he claimed he was trying to make a "sarcastic point." It's clear, he said, that the police are picking on a guy like Jones. "What people should be outraged about is that they arrest blacks for no reason. I mean, there's no reason to arrest this kid six times. Maybe he did something once, but everyone does something once."
In other words, Imus asks us to believe he was really defending the civil rights and sensitivities of African Americans. I say Imus is no longer entitled to the benefit of the doubt, and that if this were the BS meter, and not the MM, he'd get a 10 for his lame explanation. The Rutgers remark was an attempt at (sophomoric) humor. This time around, nobody's laughing. It's time for the rogue radio cowboy to ride off into the sunset.
Muzzle Meter Reading: 7
Daryl Metcalfe. Earlier this month, the Pennsylvania House of Representatives was set to pass a symbolic resolution honoring the 60th annual convention of the American chapter of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community. That is, until State Rep. Metcalfe (R., Butler) spoke up: "The Muslims do not recognize Jesus Christ as God, and I will be voting negative," he said on the House floor.
The resolution was sent back to committee, and several of Metcalfe's colleagues were shocked. Democratic Philly Rep. Babette Josephs, who is Jewish, made the best point: "I wonder what I would not also qualify for - being on the floor myself?" she asked.
Metcalfe later explained that he had a problem with a section of the resolution that likened the group's spiritual leader with William Penn. He also said lawmakers weren't given enough time to review the resolution before it came up for a vote.
Like Imus, Metcalfe's explanation is belied by its lack of immediacy. His original word choice was offensive to Muslims and anyone else who does not recognize Jesus Christ as God. Not to mention those who believe in a separation of church and state.
Muzzle Meter Reading: 9.
Charlie Black. A lobbyist and chief strategist for John McCain's campaign, Black responded to a question from Fortune's David Whitford by saying that a terrorist attack against America would be "a big advantage" for McCain's prospects in November. He also asserted in the same conversation that the assassination of Benazir Bhutto last December helped McCain re-energize what was then a long-shot campaign.
Obama spokesman Bill Burton blasted those comments, calling them "a complete disgrace." McCain, meanwhile, responded: "I cannot imagine why he would say it. It's not true. I've worked tirelessly since 9/11 to prevent another attack on the United States of America."
McCain's reaction was wise from a political perspective, but Black's words are defensible, indeed express a majority opinion. Fortune posted the article the same day a USA Today/Gallup poll found Obama with a six-point lead among a national sample of likely voters. The internals of that survey showed Obama as the preferred candidate on a variety of issues such as health care, the economy and energy. There was, however, one notable exception. When asked who would do a better job on terrorism, Obama was preferred by 33 percent, but McCain was judged the better of the two by 52 percent. What Black did not say - or imply - was that he wished for terrorism to occur. Had he done that, our reading would be in double figures. As it is:
Muzzle Meter Reading: 1.
Michael Smerconish's column appears on Thursdays in The Daily News and on Sundays in Currents. He can be heard from 5 to 9 a.m. weekdays on "The Big Talker," WPHT-AM (1210). Contact him via the Web at http://www.mastalk.com.