Some say that the Don Imus flap was a teaching moment for America. That works for me. I sure learned something troubling about liberals in the elite media – and how they don't always live up to their lofty rhetoric.
Critics charge that liberalism is about control – that liberals fund social programs, increase the size of government and squash educational reform movements, all to maintain a hold over people.
And the Imus controversy showed just how controlling some on the left could be. It appears that liberals wanted the power to decide what was offensive and what wasn't, which sins were forgivable and which weren't, what was the appropriate punishment, and when to move on. And they reserved the right to apply a double standard, lessening penalties for their cronies while lowering the boom on others.
Imus got a free ride from his pals in the media. Even after the controversy erupted, many big names in journalism continued to stand by their man. Insisting that they weren't making excuses, they tended to follow up that sentence with what sounded like an excuse.
Howard Kurtz, Washington Post media critic and host of CNN's “Reliable Sources,” wrote: “I do not believe Imus is a bigot – not a man who raised millions for cancer-stricken kids of all races to stay at his New Mexico ranch.”
Others appeared on Imus' show to offer encouragement. Liberal columnist Tom Oliphant of The Boston Globe assured the I-Man that this sort of thing could “happen to anybody” and offered “solidarity forever, pal.”
Then the Imus defenders shifted gears and challenged the credibility of Rev. Jesse Jackson and Rev. Al Sharpton, citing things they said 20 years ago. Kurtz wondered when these two became moral authorities.
When all else failed, the defenders tried to change the subject to the obscenity of rap lyrics.
That's what Tim Russert wanted to talk about. The host of NBC's “Meet the Press” and a regular guest on Imus' show, Russert professed to feeling sadness “for Don Imus and his wife and his family ... (who've) done a lot of good things for a lot of good people.” Russert then asked if it was appropriate for rap stars “who use the words like 'ho' and 'bitch' and the N-word” to raise money for Democratic politicians who condemned Imus.
That's how it's been for two weeks, with white media elites dodging the issue of racism, and African-American journalists – most notably, Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson and PBS' Gwen Ifill, who both appeared on last Sunday's “Meet the Press” – trying to keep them honest.
You don't find Latino journalists on these Sunday talk shows. That's too bad. They might come in handy given where the discussion has headed now. The liberals have changed the subject again and seized on a word that shouldn't be used in polite company, let alone in the public square.
New York Times columnist Frank Rich tried to argue that the answer to offensive speech was more speech. Rich wrote that we should “let Bill O'Reilly talk about 'wetbacks.' ”
That word is as offensive to many Latinos as the N-word is to African-Americans. In fact, let's start calling it the '“W-word.”
Kurtz picked up the thread, saying on his CNN show that “Bill O'Reilly calls Mexicans ... ” – and then he used the W-word.
Would Kurtz have used the N-word on morning television? Not a chance. So why use the W-word?
Then O'Reilly jumped in. On his show, the conservative talker claimed he had misspoken and that the word he was searching for was “coyotes.”
Now I'm searching for a word. What's Spanish for “whatever”? O'Reilly invited Kurtz on to his radio show, where this fascinating exchange took place:
O'REILLY: “In the context of what this is, and you know, obviously I misspoke – I was look looking for the word 'coyotes.' Is that a slur to you, Howard Kurtz?”
KURTZ: “I did not think that you were deliberately trying to insult the Mexican people, if that's what you're asking.”
O'REILLY: “Thank you for your honesty.”
Yes, thank you, Howard. As a Mexican (the American kind), I appreciate you taking on the burden of deciding whether someone was “deliberately trying to insult the Mexican people.”
In wrapping up his show, Russert insisted that, thanks to the Imus controversy, people had “learned a lot ... about other people's attitudes (and) sensitivities.”
I don't know. Give a listen. Some folks didn't learn all that much.
Navarrette can be reached via e-mail at
ruben.navarrette@uniontrib.com.
