In the past few decades, as political correctness has taken hold of virtually every industry, folks involved in sports and sportscasting that have made racist or sexist remarks on camera have typically been fired or forced to make public apologies.
Jimmy "The Greek" Snyder's termination by CBS back in 1988 is a fine example, with the recent two-week suspension of Golf Channel anchor Kelly Tilghman being another.
Yet, given what happened on an Atlantic City dais on January 11, where a high-profile ESPN anchor went on an alcohol-induced tirade which included a vulgar reference to Jesus Christ, it appears public antitheism is not politically incorrect.
After all, until this moment, you probably hadn't heard about this incident, and the person involved apparently has not been publicly admonished for her behavior by her employer.
While you consider such a double standard, Press of Atlantic City reported on January 12 (h/t NB reader Andy Traynor, readers are warned that vulgarity and blasphemy appear after the jump):
It was everything a roast should be: insulting, vulgar and fun. Unfortunately, the fun moments weren't frequent enough as Mike Golic and Mike Greenberg of the popular ESPN morning talk show "Mike & Mike" celebrated their eighth anniversary with a celebrity roast at a sold-out House of Blues.
[...]
ESPN anchor Dana Jacobson made an absolute fool of herself, swilling vodka from a Belvedere bottle, mumbling along and cursing like a sailor as Mike & Mike rested their heads in their hands in embarrassment. [Comedian Eddie] Griffin came to the podium to defend her after she was booed by the crowd. [Host Jeffrey] Ross eventually had to pull her off stage, too.
For those unfamiliar with Jacobson, she was a "SportsCenter" anchor for ESPN in 2005, and later made a co-host of that network's morning show "Cold Pizza" which is now "ESPN First Take."
So, what did she actually say? According to the website Deadspin:
f... Notre dame"
"f....touchdown Jesus"
and - the step-aside-because-lightning-is-about-to-strike... "f.... Jesus."
Didn't hear about this? Think it might have gotten more attention if her remarks were racist, sexist, or, heaven forbid, directed at Allah?
Heck, if she went on such a vulgarity laden anti-Muslim rant, she might have been fired that evening with ESPN airing a round-the-clock, every hour on the hour apology to prevent the Council on American-Islamic Relations from requesting a boycott of the network.
So, why the double standard?
—Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters. Follow him at Facebook and Twitter.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Double Standard
January 20, 2008 - 10:52 ET by Blogger Guy00001The double standard is because the media actually hates Christianity and loves the wrongly-named religion of peace.
Double standard- yes indeed
January 20, 2008 - 14:23 ET by august_west23As a college student in the 90s, I remember feeling like I was being indoctrinated into atheism, and sometimes just plain and simple anti-Christian attitudes and ideas. I got a degree in which many of the students would go into jobs in or related to the media. It was borderline disturbing the way students where basically taught to think one way and that was the way of the liberal left. Don't dare question them, because they would always make you feel like you were two inches tall, squashing you and your esteem in front of the class. Using the conservative and/or "Jesus Freak" as an example of un-intelligence, as one who should be looked at as "one of those people". By the time I graduated from the program I witnessed otherwise conservative, God believing students, forced into the anti-religous, liberal mold. So the fact that most of the people producing, writing, and editing programming for network news for tv and/or newspapers are liberal minded, it is no suprise. They would say they are "enlightened". I would say they were coerced. Here's the definition...
co·erce 1. To force to act or think in a certain way by use of pressure, threats, or intimidation; compel.
"Nothin' left to do but smile, smile, smile"
Im not religious
January 20, 2008 - 10:52 ET by dronetekHowever, what I see happening to christians makes me sick. All of the hypocrites who are the loudest about tolerance, are also the most biggoted when it coems to christians. Something needs to be done about this before it gets out of hand.
It is people like this that is destroying the country.
January 20, 2008 - 12:07 ET by kgIt is people like this that is destroying the country.
The only reason that they do not touch upon Islam is because they are scared.
Almost everything they believe in is against is against Islam beliefs. No wonder
the Islamic fanatics want to attack this country. Their fight is not so much
against Christianity as it is the non-believers and their 'do anything' ideals
and lack of morals.
No, Christians too
January 20, 2008 - 12:49 ET by planetrepublicanDon't kid yourself, it's against Christians too. Read some of the translation of "sermons" giving by some of the Islam's religious leaders today. It bloody and brutal against secularists, sure, but also Christians, Jews, any other religion other than Islam.
ESPN
January 20, 2008 - 13:37 ET by d1carterWhy should anyone be surprised, ESPN was the training ground of such "journalists" as K. Olbermann, the Groucho Marx of MSNBC.
Please don't trash a comic
January 20, 2008 - 14:38 ET by ArchConservativePlease don't trash a comic genius like Groucho by comparing him to a communist/marxist/liberal like Olbermann. Thanks :)
You support the troops by supporting the mission! If you don't support the mission, have the guts to say you don't support the troops.
Groucho look alike
January 20, 2008 - 19:27 ET by d1carterMy only purpose in comparing the two was for appearance only. Can't you see the resemblance?
NOT EXACTLY...
January 20, 2008 - 16:23 ET by danybhoyd 1 carter,
True, BathTubBoy become a household name on ESPN, don't compare him to Groucho Marx. Groucho had standards, it is very clear that BathTubBoy has no standards at all. I gotta believe that he has more in common with Karl Marx then he does whith Groucho Marx.
"Some of us are wise, some of us are otherwise" Mark Levin
I agree with the posts
January 20, 2008 - 17:29 ET by DEVILDOCMOMabove. Groucho Marx was a great comediac wit. I am old enough to remember him and especially his TV show. I am disappointed someone on this site would slander his memory by comparing him to k.o.
You have already answered
January 20, 2008 - 10:59 ET by ArchConservativeYou have already answered your own question. The MSM is afraid to death of Muslims but don't give a hot damn about people who believe in Jesus Christ. They love those who put Him in urine or spit on him or whatever. But they will never make fun of allah. Christ is an easy target for them.
For any other type of outrageous behavior by a memeber of the sports community, this woman would have been on the top of every SportsCenter segment but it won't even be talked about. F*** Jesus? F*** ESPN.
You support the troops by supporting the mission! If you don't support the mission, have the guts to say you don't support the troops.
Correct
January 20, 2008 - 12:52 ET by planetrepublicanYou are correct. Islamo's would put a bullet in the back of their head s and take pride and credit for it. MSM knows this and they also know no police in the world could stop them. Christians, well, not such much; in fact, no. So MSM hates all religion but is too chicken to pick on the Muslims.
the good news?
January 20, 2008 - 11:01 ET by1 there is always forgiveness
2 she was booed off the dias
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
must agree with you, sir
January 20, 2008 - 13:08 ET by bulbasaurAs an observant Catholic, I have no grievance against her because her biography isn't complete. Imagine the crazy things St. Augustine must have said as a public figure!
You know what? I love Flannery O'Connor's fiction because it's explicitly Christian, in a way she described somewhat as follows. She said that every person since the time of Jesus finds himself metaphorically facing an elipse with two focii, one focus on the the world, the other on the person of Christ and all He stands for. As O'Connor's fictional characters sometimes observe, "this Christ really screwed everything up," because from now on, everything you say and do forces you toward one or the other focus. Everything you do is in explicit relation to Christ; you're personally triangulated, in a manner of speaking. This fact makes many a man go batcrap crazy, being so filled with loathing for Christ, they reach desperately for the opposite focus, as far away from Christ as they can possibly reach, degrading themselves in the process. In some ways, this was a partial meaning of the Incarnation: He came to divide, to force each and every one of us to commit ourselves, to announce which side we're on. Some of us screw it up the first time, but we have plenty of chances to make up for our embarrassing errors.
You mention St.
January 21, 2008 - 06:49 ET by taterYou mention St. Augustine...but think about this, St. Paul persecuted Christians and spoke out against them. He later became one of the biggest preachers about it after his conversion. I agree with you because even Jesus said you can be forgiven if you are sorry about saying nasty things about Him.
Do you realize how much it costs to run for office? More than any honest man could afford. -Montgomery Burns
absolutely guys (gals?)
January 21, 2008 - 20:47 ET byand sometimes it's the very embarrassment of consequences that leads to the introspection, that leads to the plea, that leads to the offer, that leads to repentance, that leads to forgiveness. There is always forgiveness available.
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
Jacobson deserves punishment, needs treatment
January 20, 2008 - 11:03 ET by nkviking75This nasty incident had better not go unpunished, not only because of what Jacobson said, but because she appears to have an alcohol problem. Any public figure who doesn't have the sense to limit her drinking, or better yet abstain until she's done speaking, is a loose cannon who will eventually embarrass ESPN and herself again. I hope ESPN whisks her off to rehab at the very minimum.
It's amazing that this has not been a national scandal for the past week.
When you put the clowns in charge, don't be surprised when a circus breaks out.
Playing with fire
January 20, 2008 - 11:07 ET by acumenUh, oh. Someone should have told Dana that Resolut and religion don't mix.
Too late now -- There's a good chance this won't be Jacobson's last "roast." Don't worry Dana, it will only feel like an eternity.
I. Am. Amazed.
January 20, 2008 - 11:36 ET by drillanwrWOW! And Jacobson's still walking around with her head planted on her shoulders today??!!??
No big knife protruding from her chest with Christian rant inked on a blood soaked note?
No pile of rocks scattered about her bloody head sticking up from the ground where she was buried to her neck?
Not dangling from a rope swinging from a crane in the town square with her [hood and robes] blowing in the cold wind?
Not even squatting down in her own filth in some tiny dark cell with starving rats nipping at her frost-bitten toes?
No decree from the Vatican or any Christian Church leaders for her death?
Joe Namath and ESPN
January 20, 2008 - 11:52 ET by tazzDidn't Joe Namath get put through the ringer for being drunk and kissing an ESPN reporter. Espn couldn't get enough of that but when one of theirs does something stupid, Hmnn.
BROADWAY JOE...
January 20, 2008 - 16:30 ET by danybhoytazz,
Joe was a drunken mess during a Monday Night game at the Meadowlands a couple of years back, & was doing a live interview with Suzy Kolber. It's not long before he's slurring the words" ...your cute, I wanna kiss you". She tries to shake it off by thanking him, & asking him something else. "...Gimme a kiss..." She sort of ended it there.
It's rare that someone hit "rock bottom" like that on national TV, & being a puplic figure to boot. Joe has since gotten help & as far as I know, he's been clean ever since. I hope it stays that way.
"Some of us are wise, some of us are otherwise" Mark Levin
Joe
January 20, 2008 - 18:26 ET by tazzI realize that, but ESPN kept that story alive for a long time. When it's their own, it's hushed up. I've seen Joe recently and he looked great.Hopefully he got his life back together.
I'm actually surprised she
January 20, 2008 - 19:14 ET by balboaI'm actually surprised she hasn't been fired yet, consider ESPN's parent company.
Let ESPN have your feedback.
January 20, 2008 - 11:59 ET by bktI've given them mine.
http://sports.espn.g...
I'm neither Roman Catholic nor a ND fan. (I'm a grad of a perennial rival) But, her remarks should have landed her in the unemployment line, alcohol or no.
Thanks for the link; here
January 20, 2008 - 12:44 ET by motherbeltThanks for the link; here is what I just wrote them: (I used up all but 5 of the characters allowed in the window) LOL
Anchor Dana Jacobson's "performance" in Atlantic City on January 12, was offensive, disgusting, and should be an embarrassment to ESPN. Her drunken profane and vulgar anti-religious remarks went far beyond what Kelly Tilghman of the Golf Channel was recently suspended for.
I want to know how you plan to discipline Ms. Jacobson for her totally unacceptable behavior; or is that behavior acceptable to ESPN?
If nothing is done, I plan to research your sponsors and will contact them.
motherbelt
January 20, 2008 - 13:09 ET byi hope you don't mind, i copied your letter and pasted it to the ESPN comment form that i e-mailed. I didn't see a need to rewrite what you had already done such a fine job with
(ps i had 9 characters left)
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
No problem; thanks for the
January 20, 2008 - 13:29 ET by motherbeltNo problem; thanks for the compliment. I might have had the number of characters wrong...I reworded the last sentence a couple of times so as not to go over.
motherbelt, I couldn't
January 20, 2008 - 15:23 ET by msh1973motherbelt,
I couldn't have said it better myself. Thanks for what you said....so true.
Know Thy Enemy
January 20, 2008 - 12:07 ET by pocomocoIn a convoluted sort of way, this is a good thing in that almost daily we are being made aware of the extent of religious bigotry in the media as, like Jacobson, they start coming out of their anti-religion closet.
Give her a break
January 20, 2008 - 12:33 ET by Kirk TurnerYou have to keep in mind that:
1. This is a woman trying to be cool in a world dominated by men;
2. She was drunk;
3. Women in sports news are forever trying to proved their bonefides; sounds like this was the drunken Dana Jacobson version of that effort;
4. The "Jesus" references she made are to famous Notre Dame sports moments in the past (e.g., "wide right" at Florida State). Sports broadcasters have coined these terms thus because Notre Dame is a Catholic school.
5. I think this was an sports and social goof, not a religious one. If I honestly thought that Jacobson was dissing religion, I would rain all over her like a bad thunderstorm.
Let this one go.
Please tell me you forgot
January 20, 2008 - 12:47 ET by motherbeltPlease tell me you forgot to use the <sarc> notation.
You can't be serious.
Motherbelt!
January 20, 2008 - 12:59 ET by sentforth5I think it was serious. A lot of we Christian-types got big stoopid hearts.
I am a Christian; I am a
January 20, 2008 - 13:20 ET by motherbeltKirk's reasons 1,2,3, and5 are so stupid I won't even address them. As for # 4, Don Imus was just trying to talk like black rappers and got canned for it. I don't know enough about Notre Dame "inside jokes" to comment on it so I'll let it go.
I am a Christian; I am a Catholic. This isn't about "forgiveness." It's about proper behavior and respect for the religious beliefs for millions of Christians in this country. No one deserves to have their religion trashed like that. This is a country where the liberals are always talking about being "sensitive" to those of differing beliefs. We can't even have a manger scene on public property, because someone, somewhere, might be "offended" by it.
No. I don't think we should let it go.
Motherbelt
January 20, 2008 - 13:22 ET byi must disagree it is about forgiveness, that in no ways diminishes accountability. Often times it is a lack of accountability which fails to produce repentance which fails to lead to the true forgiveness. That is the true peril.
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
botg, I had to reread my
January 20, 2008 - 13:26 ET by motherbeltbotg, I had to reread my post. I originally had said "I am Christian, I am Catholic; I can personally forgive her drunken rant." And I mean that, I can. But as you said, it's about accountability. And while I may personally forgive her, she is not entitled to blanket forgiveness-without-remorse from the entire Christian community.
MB
January 20, 2008 - 13:31 ET bytough love
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
Ditto
January 20, 2008 - 21:33 ET by doug1950You took the words.....I have already forgiven her but she should not get a pass. She should be brought to task for her poor judgment and behavior as well as anyone else who wishes to "be cool" to fit in and thinks it is necessary stoop to this kind of act stupidity. "Out of the mouth the heart speaks" and I think she knew what she was saying and doing. I have written ESPN as well. The only way people will ever get the idea this kind of behavior is not acceptable is for the rest of us to say so and make it stick. Obviously she lacks the maturity to know this is offensive and unacceptable. I don't think we need to take her outside and back the Pontiac over her but she does need a wake up call for her own good.
MB
January 20, 2008 - 13:26 ET by sentforth5I'm with ya 100%.
It seems that Christianity is fun to trash on TV...and hey, their ilk KILLED Jesus, so let 'em laugh it up.
It's all going in the book, and one day they will all kneel before us. Why? On the day of the Lord EVERY knee will bow to Him and we will be standing there with Him.
Note ESPN won't release ANY of the "roast" footage
January 21, 2008 - 10:58 ET by SactoGuy88Kirk, you might want to know that there were plans by ESPN to release some footage of the Mike & Mike Celebrity Roast on ESPN Radio's web page. It appears that due to the extremely vulgar nature of the roast the "empty suits" (as ESPN Radio host Mike Greenberg is wont to say) won't allow any public screening of that footage anytime soon.
What Jacobsen said was only the tip of the iceberg in terms of vulgar remarks said that night.
Again...these roasts are
January 21, 2008 - 10:59 ET by balboaAgain...these roasts are extremely vulgar by nature.
A social goof?
January 23, 2008 - 23:00 ET by BritcomIf this was really an error in judgment, where is her public apology to Christians whom she has offended? Why is she not attending sensitivity training for Christian bigotry? Where is the hefty donation to a Christian Charity.
No, I don't believe this was a mistake. This was Anti-Christianism in all of its ugliness.
Something Stupid
January 20, 2008 - 12:43 ET by Wildcatter1980This was indeed something stupid on Ms Jacobson's part. She evidently has a problem and she should get the help she needs, a.k.a. proper substance abuse detoxification and counseling.
I say this because I have heard Rush Limbaugh when he talks about his experience with his addiction to prescription painkillers. Unlike Hollywood celebrities who "check" themselves into "rehab" only to "avoid" prosecution or whatever, Limbaugh entered with the proper resolve to use the program to beat his addiction. He genuinely wanted to overcome this. He touts this as THE best thing could have done. He says he learned a lot about himself, how it was possible to become addicted and how to beat it
As to ESPN/ABC, after the Kelly Tilghman and Golfweek situations, management has no choice but to suspend Ms Jacobson immediately without pay stating that she can apply for reinstatement only after a.) apologizing for her statements, b.) successfully completing a substance abuse counseling program and c.) agreeing to random testing to screen against alcohol and drug use.
Just my $0.02
I wonder if she was
January 20, 2008 - 12:57 ET by BlazerI wonder if she was drinking Ketel One and if she busted up her teef's outside on the curb when she left. Dana, you make Randi Rhodes proud.
"You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious. "
- Ben Kenobi on Liberals, and the MSM.
" The Cake is a lie."
The media doesn't care
January 20, 2008 - 13:04 ET by greenfairieThey have no use for the religious unless they're Muslims. ESPN was hoping this would pass under the radar without the holy rollers finding out about it.
I see the problem
January 20, 2008 - 13:38 ET by Lame CherryThankfully to Mr. Shep, I see the problem by the photo he posted of this rather horse toothed female.
She dresses in low cut dresses and has no cleavage, so she drinks to dull the pain of not having any men or women staring down here dress so she can pretend she doesn't like it.
This in turn makes her angry at God for making her a sunken chest pirates dream and out pops her hatred for Catholics as even she could not get accosted there by pedophiles and Jesus did not hear her prayer to give her big boobies.
She is so miserable without boobies that she hopes God will strike her dead...........
Perhaps though she in time will burn out and return to Jesus and ask forgiveness in God's loving plan. God bless her........and give her understanding that big boobies would not help her as the problem is her.
*HIC IACET ARTORIVS REX QVONDAM REXQVE FVTVRVS
LC!
January 20, 2008 - 13:42 ET by sentforth5I love yer posts, man.
Love 'em.
Noel
January 20, 2008 - 13:44 ET by tnculpI'm dissapointed! You're supposed to say:
It All Has A Name
January 20, 2008 - 13:57 ET by reelman46I call the modern liberal a secular socialist... we all should... its what fits.
Doug Schexnayder, Ph.D. (theconservativecrawfish)
AM I THE ONLY ONE...
January 20, 2008 - 16:34 ET by danybhoyreelman46,
Isn't a modern liberal / secular socialist nothing more then a communist? Just asking...
"Some of us are wise, some of us are otherwise" Mark Levin
Lucky for her...
January 20, 2008 - 14:40 ET by Avusshe didn't call Him "nappy-headed Jesus".
Couple of points: This
January 20, 2008 - 16:11 ET by balboaCouple of points:
This wasn't on TV. It was a private event, wasn't it?
Roasts are known for their inappropriate moments.
Balboa
January 20, 2008 - 16:16 ET by Noel SheppardB,
Michael Richards' comments weren't televised, and were at a comedy club where all kinds of inappropriate comments are made by all kinds of comedians. This set off a media firestorm.
Any other points, B? ns
Do you think that Richards'
January 20, 2008 - 16:22 ET by balboaDo you think that Richards' rant is on the same level as this one? Richards' was anger-filled. I haven't seen the other one.
And I believe that roasts are even more politically incorrect than comedy club events.
Balboa
January 20, 2008 - 16:25 ET by Noel SheppardB,
Do you think what Kelly Tilghman said on the Golf Channel warranted her suspension? Or what the Golf Magazine's editor put on the front cover warranted his termination? ns
Kelly: No. Golf Magazine:
January 20, 2008 - 16:29 ET by balboaKelly: No.
Golf Magazine: Possibly. I thought that cover was stupid, trying to be "thought-provoking" when really it was way more antagonistic than the situation called for.
B
January 20, 2008 - 16:32 ET by Noel SheppardB,
He should get fired for that? If Kelly didn't deserve to be suspended, how could a magazine pointing that out be wrong? Think about it. ns
It's not that. I think the
January 20, 2008 - 17:16 ET by balboaIt's not that. I think the cover was wayyyy over the top. So I'd want to know exactly the reasoning for using a noose of all things on the cover. If the editor had good reasons, he'd stay.
I imagine in the end that I'd put the person on a short leash.
B
January 20, 2008 - 17:23 ET by Noel SheppardB,
Forgive me, but don't liberals like "over the top?" I thought conservatives are supposed to be, well, conservative. :-)
You know when the race issue in our nation will cease being the race issue? When we're ALL able to say whatever we want -- regardless of how over the top -- and nobody will be offended or try to make it a political issue.
Political correctness has been a HUGE failure in this nation, and has only added to the tensions between the races and the genders. ns
Will religion ever cease
January 20, 2008 - 17:31 ET by balboaWill religion ever cease being an issue?
And if you don't agree with PC, then why are you concerned about comments made by a drunk woman at a roast?
B
January 20, 2008 - 17:36 ET by Noel SheppardB,
Concerned? Not at all. Looking for equal treatment for similar offenses. Wondering why there are rules for conservatives and Republicans that don't apply to liberals.
Of course, if I was on your side of the aisle, I might feel the way you do and just appreciate the injustice continually demonstrated by these double standards. After all, they benefit you.
On the other hand, though enjoying the obvious advantage, I guarantee that I'd be honest enough to admit it, and not just to myself! :-) ns
I know there are double
January 20, 2008 - 17:45 ET by balboaI know there are double standards. I just don't think anyone would be too concerned about what is said by someone at a roast, regardless of political affiliation.
B
January 20, 2008 - 17:50 ET by Noel SheppardB,
Are you serious? So, because this is a roast, anything goes? What about the n-word? Is that acceptable at a roast? Or, what about saying "F*** Allah" or "F*** Muslims?" Do you think that would raise some concern? Or, is it all good because it's a roast? ns
Have you ever seen a roast?
January 20, 2008 - 17:54 ET by balboaHave you ever seen a roast?
Balboa
January 20, 2008 - 17:56 ET by Noel SheppardB,
Don't answer a question with a question! Would all of those things be okay at a roast? ns
I haven't heard those things
January 20, 2008 - 18:03 ET by balboaI haven't heard those things specifically, but the things I have heard at roasts, I would not be surprised one iota.
a huge stink would be raised
January 23, 2008 - 22:36 ET by BritcomThe answer is no; a huge stink would be raised if the N word were used, in fact most of the roast panel would walk out and Sharpton would be parachuting into the parking lot with his podium. But being insensitive to the followers of Jesus... well not only is that okay, it shows how courageous and edgy the speaker is. Not!
The media don't hire Christians, they don't know any Christians, they don't have any Christian friends, they never visit Christian Churches or Christian Communities, or Christian organizations, so they don't think they really exist. For them it's a little like abusing and insulting snowmen. They are convinced that they aren't real and no one will care. They need to be proven wrong. Public humiliation is the only way.
PETA throws red paint on famous people who wear fur. Perhaps famous people who insult and abuse Jesus publicly should be doused with a bucket of red wine publicly.
I can see the exclusive pics on TMZ now. :)
I just don't think anyone
January 20, 2008 - 19:39 ET by motherbeltI just don't think anyone would be too concerned about what is said by someone at a roast, regardless of political affiliation.
Don't be too sure, bal. My husband was recently watching an ad on TV for a DVD set of the old Dean Martin roasts. Everyone was practically falling out of their chairs laughing. None of it was of the hateful variety you so often see today...they all knew it was in good fun. But even at that, we both agreed that the jokes they made about Sammy Davis Jr., and in fact a lot of the jokes in general, would cause apoplexy in libs and the "professional offendees" today.
With all due respect, Dean
January 20, 2008 - 19:53 ET by balboaWith all due respect, Dean Martin's roasts are a far cry from, say, the Friar's Roasts. The jokes in those weren't hateful either, but WOW were they risque.
B
January 20, 2008 - 16:26 ET by Noel SheppardB,
Roasts are more politically incorrect than comedy club events? Tell that to Chris Rock and Eddie Murphy! ns
Will do. I'll see them at
January 20, 2008 - 16:31 ET by balboaWill do. I'll see them at this week's Liberal Conspiracy meeting at the lodge.
B
January 20, 2008 - 16:33 ET by Noel SheppardB,
Isn't the lodge restricted? :-) ns
Ted Danson
January 21, 2008 - 13:18 ET by azholmesTed's little politically incorrect performance at a roast in '93(?) got a bit of attention.
" Whoopi Goldberg recently scolded critics who attacked her boyfriend,
former "Cheers" star Ted Danson, as racist for appearing in blackface
at a Friars Club roast in her honor, saying they should have expected
tasteless, vulgar humor."
What was wrong with those people? It's just a little bit of un-PC fun at a roast.
This does not surprise me
January 20, 2008 - 16:30 ET by LilyPearlThis does not surprise me because remember these scriptures that Jesus spoke:
John 15: 18-19
18 "If the world hates you, keep in mind that it hated me first. 19 If you belonged to the world, it would love you as its own. As it is, you do not belong to the world, but I have chosen you out of the world. That is why the world hates you.
Matthew 5:11-12
11 "Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me. 12 Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you.
I praise God that as a Christian I have this blessed hope.
If she doesn't get at least
January 20, 2008 - 17:42 ET by EdhenryIf she doesn't get at least what kelly T got at the Golf C, then it is clear example of double standard at weak, biased, liberal, PC, anti-Christian, unprincipled MSM. I don't like what kelly said, but no ones believes there was a shred of intent.
Ok to deliberately bash Christianity to its core. Must be a journalist.
It was a roast, not live
January 20, 2008 - 17:50 ET by balboaIt was a roast, not live TV.
And Michael Richards' rant
January 20, 2008 - 18:16 ET by motherbeltAnd Michael Richards' rant was in a Comedy Club with PAID admission. That didn't save him.
And Fuzzy Zoeller was banished to the outer darkness for implying that blacks like fried chicken, for crying out loud!
Noel said it very well: Looking for equal treatment for similar offenses.
Don't even TRY to pretend there's not a double standard.
You can talk venue all you want...the real difference is that Jacobson's drunken rant was insulting and offensive to Christians.
Of course there are double
January 20, 2008 - 19:13 ET by balboaOf course there are double standards. A lot of this is hard to judge without seeing video. Richards' rant was not part of his show, not done as part of comedy. He lashed out in anger.
A lot of this is hard to
January 20, 2008 - 20:13 ET by motherbeltA lot of this is hard to judge without seeing video. Richards' rant was not part of his show, not done as part of comedy. He lashed out in anger.
What would you expect to see in the video...what "context" could you find that would make it OK?
As long as it's part of the act, it's OK to insult Christians, or blacks, or whoever? If Michael Richards showed up drunk and said the things he said as jokes, trying to be funny, not in anger, that would be OK?
I'm really having a hard time understanding where you draw the line here, bal; you keep changing the criteria....it's a roast, it was a comedy club; it was part of a comedy act; he was angry....so I have to come to the conclusion that you are stretching to the breaking point to rationalize the imbalance of reaction. You're starting to sound like a little kid in trouble, who, as his parents keep cross-examining his excuses, offers more and more outlandish explanations.
You've agreed "Of course there's a double standard." Double standard means different judgment for the same transgression by different people. Why do you then twist things around to insist that they are NOT the same?
I don't know what I would
January 20, 2008 - 20:26 ET by balboaI don't know what I would see on the video, but it would help the whole discussion.
I don't have specific rules for when it's "OK to insult Christians." I think if you're being malicious, that's not a good thing. If you're drunk and just rambling, that's just irresponsible.
When do you think it's OK to insult Christians? When is it OK to poke fun? What's the difference?
It is never "OK" to insult
January 20, 2008 - 21:44 ET by amberIt is never "OK" to insult anyone, but most people, normal people, just shrug it off. People say awful things about me more than I know, but I don't care, I am who I am and at the end of the day I am the one who has to live with myself. It is different when people insult my husband, my children, or my God; that I can not let go.
No, it's not OK to insult,
January 20, 2008 - 23:39 ET by balboaNo, it's not OK to insult, but you know what they do at roasts? Insult everyone and anything.
Bal, don't be disingenuous.
January 20, 2008 - 22:31 ET by motherbeltBal, don't be disingenuous. I'm not going to get into a discussion of that...you know darn well that what she said was not "poking fun." Insulting is never OK...I didn't like it when Don Rickles did it either, because he always came off as mean-spirited.
And there you go again, making distinctions to fortify your ever-changing characterizations. A drunk can do just as much harm without being "malicious." Saying hateful things because you think you're being funny doesn't make them any less hateful. And no one gave Mel Gibson a break because he was drunk and rambling... they said it brought out his true feelings. Why would anyone think differently of Ms. Jacobson?
Instead of agreeing that "of course there's a double standard" and then trying to explain why the Jacobson and Richards incidents are different, you should have just gone with "no double standard." You can't say there is one and then use as your argument the fact that they are different situations.
And that's all I am going to say on this subject.
I make distinctions because
January 20, 2008 - 23:38 ET by balboaI make distinctions because they exist. Jacobson and Richards incidents are different. Sorry. Not saying one is better than the other, just different.
Well, Bal, my mother always
January 21, 2008 - 09:30 ET by motherbeltWell, Bal, my mother always said I couldn't leave well enough alone, LOL.
I'm glad to see that you are now arguing that they are different situations (even though I disagree). You shouldn't have said at the beginning "of course there is a double standard" because the term "double standard" means different standards for similar situations....you think they different situations, and therefore are subject to different standards.
Glad we got that cleared up ;-)
situational explaination,
January 20, 2008 - 18:54 ET by Edhenrysituational explaination, the lowest form of defense. The forum is irrelevant. Character is what you do when no one is watching.
If you substitute Jesus in this rant with MLK, Mohammed, Allah, Ellie Weisel, what would be reported?
situational explaination,
January 20, 2008 - 19:09 ET by balboasituational explaination, the lowest form of defense. The forum is irrelevant.
What a bunch of baloney. Context means a lot.
Context
January 20, 2008 - 21:13 ET by saw the lightI agree that context means a lot. If she was saying that she heard some Muslim saying, "F******* Jesus" the context changes the story.
However, she got drunk and grabbed a microphone and began to insult Christians. There is no doubt that it happened. Context to me does NOT include the location as much as the additional comments made. The additional comments showed that this reporter meant nothing more than "F******* Jesus."
I'm sure if this story gets more play, you will hear the "free speech" argument. And I will defend her right to say what she did. That being said, she still must face the consequences of her actions. Let's see if ESPN will hold her to a similar standard they had for Rush Limbaugh for supposed "racist" remarks.
Double standard
January 20, 2008 - 22:43 ET by Cool ArrowIs "double standard" the same as "hypocrisy"? Of course it is.
So what does that say about those who would justify this rant and condemn Richards?
Somebody's letting the irony sail right over his head.
I ♣ My Seal
I am by no means excusing
January 20, 2008 - 22:51 ET by JerI am by no means excusing Jacobson's behavior. Her remarks were clearly offensive and inappropriate in any context. But, for the record, I understand she also took several verbal swipes at Mike Greenberg's Jewish ethnicity.
A degree of tastelessness is expected and acceptable at roasts. And, of course, Golick is a Notre Dame alum. But, still, she went too far.
Jer
Roast
January 20, 2008 - 22:57 ET by Cool ArrowAnd some (quite a few) attendees were African Americans. Man those jokes woulda' been funny, huh?
But she reaches way back to Golic's college days? How old was she back then? Maybe five? Sorry, it's got nothing to do with a roast.
I ♣ My Seal
Well, I think it did
January 20, 2008 - 23:30 ET by JerWell, I think it did have something to do with the roast. She was making "jokes" about religion, athletics, and Notre Dame aimed at an ESPN sports commentator who played football at the most prominent Catholic university in the nation.
Unfortunately, the jokes were unfunny and offensive.
Jer
OK, Jer
January 20, 2008 - 23:54 ET by Cool ArrowBut more recently, Golic starred in the teen sitcom "Head of the Class - The College Years"
Reckon this twit let out a rant against Hollywood producers with their young boy proclivities? Hardly
I see. If you lack funny material, curse God. Works every time.
If she isn't fired, there can be no other explanation than this: ESPN HATES GOD and those who believe in him.
ESPN fired Rush for his accuracy and called it racist. Can they do less than fire Kelly Tilghman for hateful speech directed at a sizeable portion of sports fans.
Let's all laugh at God the next time we see a Darryl Stingley helpless on the field.
I ♣ My Seal
"Should we fire Dana?" "Nah.
January 20, 2008 - 23:59 ET by balboa"Should we fire Dana?"
"Nah. We hate God, remember?"
"Oh yeah! Whew! That was a close one."
Cool Arrow...if you read
January 21, 2008 - 04:04 ET by JerCool Arrow...if you read all my posts, I think you'll find we agree on the core issues. But, now you are stating some rather dubious premises, and reaching some highly questionable conclusions.
But more recently, Golic starred on the teen sitcom "Head of the Class - The College Years"
Reckon this twit let out a rant against Hollywood producers with their young boy proclivities? Hardly
Do you know that she didn't? I think there was more to her alcohol-fueled ramblings than just the anti-Christian rant. And if she had possessed the sense and mental clarity to utter a clever put-down about Golic's acting career, she might very well have done so.
I see. If you lack funny material, curse God. Works every time.
Really? That's interesting. Jacobson was booed mercilessly and eventually ignominiously removed from the stage, while the guests on the dais and most of the audience were mortified with embarrassment. Doesn't seem to have "worked" too well for Dana. [By the way, I bet there are a fair number of Christians who find the whole "touchdown Jesus" sporting imagery at Notre Dame to be trivializing and frivolously irreligious. What do you think?]
If she isn't fired, there can be no other explanation than this: ESPN HATES GOD and those who believe in him.
Wow! That statement is so breathtakingly bizarre, I can't even formulate a proportionate response. I think I'll just let it sit there...oozing preposterousness.
ESPN fired Rush for his accuracy and called it racist. Can they do less than fire Kelly Tilghman for hateful speech directed at a sizeable portion of sports fans.
Well, at the risk of provoking further attacks from motherbelt and acumen over the Rush/ESPN controversy, I still contend Limbaugh's comments concerning McNabb were of debatable accuracy, freighted with inflammatory political and social implications, and could be construed as racially insensitive. [Personally, as I have previously stated, I do not believe Rush is racist and have never accused him of such.] With respect to the rest of your statement, I would need some clarification: Are you referring to Kelly Tilghman or Dana Jacobson?
Let's all laugh at God the next time we see a Darryl Stingley helpless on the field.
Okay...you laugh, I'll pray.
Jer
→ Dana, Jer
January 21, 2008 - 12:29 ET by Cool ArrowBut I wasn't able to make the correction before it got an attachment. Thanks.
Espn fires Dana or it demonstrates its disdain for Christians. They laid down the ground rules with Rush. I didn't make the reules, they did.
But the next time you hear an ESPN analyst spit out the token cliche: "Certainly our prayers and heartfelt sympathy go out to (fill in the blank) and his family, you're gonna remember that one way or the other, ESPN already made a statement.
Wait and see. But you're welcome to defend them if you wish.
I ♣ My Seal
That makes is even worse.
January 20, 2008 - 23:01 ET by motherbeltThat makes is even worse. It indicates that she took the microphone with the intention of doing a whole "bashing religions" routine.
I think she engaged in
January 20, 2008 - 23:19 ET by JerI think she engaged in indiscriminate wholesale "bashing" on a variety of topics until they dragged her off the stage.
Jer
Jer
January 20, 2008 - 23:23 ET by Noel SheppardJer,
Good evening. Where did you see she made anti-Semitic remarks about Greenberg? I hadn't seen that anywhere. ns
Hi Noel...I believe the
January 20, 2008 - 23:42 ET by JerHi Noel...I believe the reference was in one of the comments posted by someone who supposedly was in attendance.
I'll see if I can find it. There were three or four different articles or blog updates with separate comments. I read them all, but it may take me awhile to locate that particular one.
By the way, it was stated a video of Jacobson's embarrassing performamce exists, but I don't think it has ever been posted. [Probably shredded by ESPN suits.]
Jer
Jer
January 20, 2008 - 23:53 ET by Noel SheppardJer,
Yeah, Deadspin thought there's a video out there somewhere. I imagine somebody filmed it. Got to wonder why we haven't seen it anywhere yet. How convenient for Dana.
Of course, since antitheism when directed at Judeo-Christian principles is all the vogue these days, I don't imagine she'll get in much trouble for this. Do you? ns
Noel...I think if it had
January 21, 2008 - 00:14 ET by JerNoel...I think if it had been a public event...yes. In this case, no.
Jer
Jer: It was a public
January 21, 2008 - 03:01 ET by stratmanJer:
Killing them with kindness isn't working. Time to get scrappy with the Donkeys.
strat...Thanks for the
January 21, 2008 - 04:41 ET by Jerstrat...Thanks for the additional information. I knew it was held at a House of Blues, but for some reason I was thinking it was essentially a "corporate" affair, attended by ESPN staff, employees, contributors, etc. The fact that tickets were sold to the general public does add to the egregiousness of Jacobson's conduct.
I do believe however that the fact this was a "roast" where a good deal of behavioural latitude is tolerated--and that the event was untelevised--are mitigating factors; but only in the matter of degree. I'm not defending Jacobson. I agree with your analysis. Her conduct was inexcusable.
Back in my imbibing days, vodka was my drink of choice. But, I really wasn't familiar with Belvedere...I guess maybe it was beyond my budget. For me...occasionally splurged on Stolie, but mostly it was Skye. [Easy on the hangovers.]
Jer
Speeches at roasts do
January 21, 2008 - 12:19 ET by stratmanSpeeches at roasts do allow for a greater degree of ribaldness but not stupidity. When comedians pull you offstage things must be pretty bad.
Belvedere seems to be a relatively recent player on the scene. I don't recall it 20-30 years ago either and it would have been more than I would wanted to pay for vodka at that time. Back then, Absolut was my choice though Stoli was a treat too.
Killing them with kindness isn't working. Time to get scrappy with the Donkeys.
Absolutely...Absolut. How
January 21, 2008 - 16:23 ET by JerAbsolutely...Absolut. How could I have forgotten. On second thought, there is probably quite a lot I don't remember from those days.
Jer
I remember keeping the
January 21, 2008 - 22:19 ET by stratmanI remember keeping the vodka in the freezer. Beyond that, I have to agree with you on the scanty memory... being so long ago of course. ;-)
Almost bought some port but then wimped out thinking about GERD. I just don't drink much. A six pack of beer may last a couple of months. Smarter but sad what becomes of us when we age.
Noel...I located what I
January 21, 2008 - 02:07 ET by JerNoel...I located what I believe was the comment I had in mind, and, due to some slightly confusing phrasing, but even moreso to my admittedly hurried reading, I may have misinterpreted the poster's remarks. Here's the complete quote:
any of the speakers had made similar comments about Greenie's ethnicity to those made by Dana Jacobson, they'd be out of work-forever. What's up, ESPN with the double standard?
I originally thought the poster was stating that Jacobson had in fact made comments about Greenberg's [Jewish] ethnicity, but a more careful reading suggests the poster was merely hypothesizing that if she had made anti-Semitic jokes instead of anti-Christian jokes, Jacobson would already be fired.
My error.
Jer
Ever heard of the Friar's Club Roast?
January 21, 2008 - 11:10 ET by SactoGuy88I think a lot of people here are really missing the point of what happened at the Mike & Mike Celebrity Roast.
Does anyone here know of the legendary Friar's Club in New York City? Their famous celebrity "roasts" are known to be extremely vulgar and politically incorrect by anybody's standards, yet they're still going on even today. That's the nature of celebrity "roasts"--things can get vulgar quite quickly.
EXACTLY. Thank you.
January 21, 2008 - 11:20 ET by balboaEXACTLY. Thank you.
Answer is simple
January 20, 2008 - 17:40 ET by BritcomBecause Christians don't slit throats or issue fatwas when some faithist b!tch goes on a public hate rant about the Lord of Lords.
These people don't respect our religion and they won't until some "religious fundamentalist group" burns a cross on their lawn.
F*** Jesus needs
January 20, 2008 - 19:31 ET by EdhenryF*** Jesus needs context?
Now that you can't respond to the first issue, answer the second. Which is what this blog is all about. What would the liberal facist weak codependent group think PC biased MSM report if it was any of the following: F** Mohamned, MLK, Ellie Weisel, instead of Jesus?
Anyone..... anyone...?
Of course there would go up
January 21, 2008 - 02:35 ET by BritcomOf course there would go up a veritable human cry. So now the question is: Who out there in America defends Christ?
{crickets}
That is the problem. Christianity has become lukewarm. Read the first chapter of Revelation and you will see that God foretold this age and this people. He has an appropriate remedy too. Read it.
St. Peter at the proverbial
January 20, 2008 - 23:26 ET by drillanwrSt. Peter at the proverbial "Pearly Gates": "Now, Dana ... I see here where you said, and I quote, "f.... Jesus." ... Now, would you care to put that into context ? You have one shot and 30 seconds." St. Peter clicks the stop watch, "GO!"
You know when this Jesus bashing really kicked in? Remember that scene in "The Exorcist"? Linda Blair in the center of the bed with the Crucifix demanding, F*** me, Jesus! ... ?
I don't know about the rest of you who saw that movie, especially when it first came out (I was in high school) ... but what was most terrifying and disturbing for me wasn't he blood and gore and the head spinning and even the Devil's voice ... It was the blasphemy on complete display. I had gone to Catholic grade school, and was attending public high school. I NEVER understood blasphemy until that movie.
Drill
January 20, 2008 - 23:31 ET by Noel SheppardDrill,
Interesting. As a big fan of that movie, and the book, I never saw them as being antitheist. After all, in the end, Father Karras is the hero that saves the little girl from the demon Pazuzu.
To me, this was a classic battle between good and evil taking place inside this little girl, with good, in the end, winning.
Isn't that a positive religious image, or am I missing something? ns
Noel -
January 21, 2008 - 00:32 ET by drillanwrI was about 17 when I first saw the movie (at a drive-in) ...
Although I was only out of Catholic grade school a few years, I still recognized the clear blasphemy depicted in the movie ... In other words, yes, I know the good vs. evil theme therein ... and good triumphs ... I did get that when I saw the movie. But as someone who was so young and thought, yeah, okay, blasphemy ... whatever ... The word meant nothing to me.
It was like, well, you know the old saying, "I can't define what pornography is, but I'll know it when I see it ..." ? But when I saw that on the screen, especially THAT scene, I was actually in awe of "seeing" it ... blasphemy. Not so much that the movie was the blasphemy (although I know that issue was argued when the movie first came out ... and if my Mother had found out I'd gone to see it ... wooo!), but the blasphemy itself being depicted, almost to a level of perfection. They taught us these terms and such in grade school with the attitude Blasphemy, it's bad ... don't do it ... you'll go to Hell ... , but you just never had an image of what the heck they were talking about ... But THERE was the image, in full color and sound and dialog on that huge drive-in theater screen reflecting off my 17 yr. old eye balls gaping wide open in shock.
While I agree with you that the story was a classic good/evil fight, my core point was that it seems to me someone decided, from the point of that movie on (most especially that scene), that Jesus/Christianity was now fodder and fair game for anyone and everyone who believed themselves of a "creative" or "artistic" nature ... and then there are those, as pointed out in your article, who just use it all for a very easy and cheap effect because coming up with something actually original would be too much hard thought and work.
Drill
January 21, 2008 - 09:55 ET by Noel SheppardDrill,
Well, I actually first read the book at 13 -- read it four times! -- and saw the film at 14. Anyway, last night as I was trying to find a YouTube video of the scene in question, I stumbled upon a BBC special on the film in which auther William Peter Blatty discussed that scene.
Apparently, he saw Chris McNeil (kid's mom, played eventually by Ellen Burstyn) as being either agnostic or atheist. If you remember, a psychiatrist at the sanitarium she brings Regan to, after they've exhausted all options, suggests that she get an exorcism. McNeil says, "So, you're telling me I should bring my daughter to a witch doctor?"
Blatty felt that as a non-believer, McNeil wouldn't go for this option. So, he tried to imagine what could happen to her daughter that would make her believe Regan was actually possessed and NOT just mentally or physically ill. That's when he came up with the crucifix idea, because he felt that such an image, of her daughter masturbating with a crucifix while the demon is saying, "Let Jesus f*** you" would make Chris believe that Regan was actually possessed.
Remember, what made this book so extraordinary when it came out was the discussions that transpired around the country about whether she was possessed or just crazy. This argument was occurring within Chris, and as a good writer, Blatty needed to show the reader why this agnostic/atheist would suddenly change her mind, and seek the assistance of the church.
Remember, earlier in the book/movie, Chris finds a crucifix under Regan's pillow, and flips out. This was to demonstrate to the reader/viewer just how antagonistic Chris was to religion. Something had to tip the scales in order for her to seek out an exorcist, which indeed was key to the plot.
As such, adding it all up, not only was this a battle between good and evil, it was also a conversion of a non-believer to a believer. Furthermore, as Chris was divorced, and Regan being raised by a single mother, many also saw the film as antagonistic towards divorce, and in support of a traditional family unit. ns
Noel -
January 21, 2008 - 11:48 ET by drillanwrI get and agree with EVERYTHING you and the others commenting are saying about the story and movie. I'm sorry my point is lost in MY translation, as I sometimes tend to run circles around a point.
The word blasphmey was completely vague to me. The Priests and the Nuns harped on NOT doing it, but never really presented defining [visuals] or evidence of it, if you will.
What I'm saying is: The Crucifix scene ... yeah, THAT did it for me. Blasphemy was NOW recognizable to me. Wasn't just a weird ethereal word anymore. It was now earthly and human.
Crucifix in a jar of urine ... blasphemy.
Elephant crap splattered on the Virgin Mary ... blasphemy.
Life-sized, anatomically correct chocolate Jesus the public is invited to lick ... blasphemy.
Excellent analysis of The Exorcist, Noel...
January 21, 2008 - 16:11 ET by JerExcellent analysis of The Exorcist, Noel...perhaps you should branch out into book reviewing.
I, too, was thoroughly riveted by Blatty's tour de force...a book--I think the only one--I literally could not put down. Locked the doors...closed the blinds...and read, spellbound, straight through to the end.
Jer
I agree
January 21, 2008 - 08:44 ET by kbworkmanThe whole point of the movie was the defeat of evil.
The graphic depiction of the affects of an evil entity invading a young girl was to give the viewers a look at evil. Not to glorify evil.
The intent of the foul language and hinted activities was to get the story and the feel into a short time span.
Watching a young girl who couldn't defend herself against such a powerful evil helped buy religious defenders, even to the loss of their own lives... I don't think that is what is causing such a lack of respect of religious concepts.
I think it is more a loss of faith. Those of us who find this trend offensive don't have a enough faith in our beliefs to fight the trend.
The only thing necessary for evil to succede is for good people to do nothing.
I agree...you have to
January 21, 2008 - 09:40 ET by motherbeltI agree...you have to portray evil in order to portray a fight against
evil. I didn't see the movie; I read the book. After reading the book
I had NO desire to see the movie!
I don't know if the intention of the author or the screenwriters to depict such an extreme scene in such a graphic manner in order to show the depth of evil or to push the envelope of "artistry" so I can't judge that.
And I think the line between those two is becoming more blurred every day.
I agree...you have to
January 21, 2008 - 09:45 ET by motherbeltI agree...you have to portray evil in order to portray a fight against
evil. I didn't see the movie; I read the book. After reading the book
I had NO desire to see the movie!
I don't know if the intention of the author or the screenwriters to depict such an extreme scene in such a graphic manner in order to show the depth of evil or to push the envelope of "artistry," so I can't judge that.
But I think the line between those two is becoming more blurred every day.
We let it happen.
January 21, 2008 - 08:31 ET by kbworkmanIf you want something done about this, do something.
Stop listening to stations and shows that condone this kind of behavior. Otherwise sit back and relax secure in the knowlege that you are part of the problem.
Don't forget
January 21, 2008 - 09:40 ET by MivvisTed Danson's 1993 performance at the Friars club roast. He catch any flak from that?
Whoopie
January 21, 2008 - 11:16 ET by mikebromoWhoopie Golberg dumped him.
AHH!! So he benefitted.
January 21, 2008 - 13:25 ET by RESTLESS 1AHH!! So he benefitted.
Good one, Restless.
January 21, 2008 - 15:51 ET by JerGood one, Restless.
I am a member at espn and
January 21, 2008 - 14:18 ET by NortoI am a member at espn and posted a query as to what they might do in this case, but have had no response. At a minimum they might suggest strongly she seek treatment as a condition of keeping her position-not unreasonable I would think.
*** UPDATE *** ...ESPN anchor suspended
January 23, 2008 - 16:12 ET by LionKingDana Jacobsen has been suspended for one week (so far).
Interestingly, she only apologizes about remarks pertaining to Notre Dame. She did not apologize for the F*** Jesus remark.
Here is the ESPN post.
[Also of interest is the wild exchange of comments on this story. There are some truly ignorant people when is comes understanding Freedom of Speech protection from the government and a company trying to exercise public decency.]
I think the F J remark fell
January 23, 2008 - 16:19 ET by balboaI think the F J remark fell under the umbrella of her Notre Dame remarks.
Bal, that was as lame as I have seen you post in recent memory..
January 23, 2008 - 22:43 ET by JAB...would you care to try again with the focus toward a legitimate argument?
"Too bad Ignorance isn't painful..."