I'm no great fan of Don Imus or his show. But I do occasionally watch a few minutes of it for much the same reason that I watch Donald Trump's show: clowns can be entertaining.

How anyone can take seriously anything that Imus says is beyond my comprehension. His show has always been about disparaging people. He routinely has friendly conversations with politicians and reporters on the phone and then insults them after they hang up. Calling members of the Rutgers women's basketball team "nappy-headed hos" was a stupid thing to do, but doing and saying stupid things is his trademark. What made this stupid remark different is that the race hustlers were apparently short on ambulances to chase. Sharpton and Jackson jumped on it like buzzards on road-kill.

The term that Imus used comes from blacks. It is indiscriminately used by rappers to refer to black women in general. The only difference that I can see between Imus and rappers is that Imus applied the term to a specific group of women that he had no reason to believe are whores. The idea that it is alright for blacks, but not whites, to use terms like "nappy-headed hos" and "niggas" is absurd.

The concept of an exclusive "black community" that I've heard mentioned a lot this week is more racist to me than Imus' stupid remark. On one talk show black guests insisted that problems like Imus' remark had to be handled by the black community and that whites should stay out of it. Imagine the outcry if a white person suggested that blacks should move aside and let us white folks deal with our problems. Further, how does this black community alone expect to deal with a problem that obviously involves whites? Clearly, what the black guests really meant is that they don't want any dissent from whites, just acquiescence.

The best way to handle an incident like this is to let the free market decide. Instances of forced viewing of radio and television shows are rare. The only time I listen to rap music is when I hear it from a car next to me at a traffic light. Most individuals are free to tune in or not to tune in. If you don't like what is being said or shown just don't listen or watch. Choose another program or read a book. If you don't like the music don't buy the CD. If enough people don't listen or watch the show will eventually go away. If enough people don't buy the CDs the music will go away.

Of course the corporation airing the show and its sponsors are free to make market decisions too. In this case MSNBC and the sponsors have chosen to cancel the television show. I would have preferred that they wait and let the viewers decide but it is their decision to make. I hope their decision was market based and not just caving to the race extortionists.

---

I returned home yesterday from a 1500 mile road trip to Dallas. One of my wife's relatives got married there on Saturday. The trip went well except for one thing: I learned that I can't depend on hotel lobby computers for e-mail and blogging. I suppose I'll have to give in and get a laptop (I hate laptops).

We stayed in a very nice Marriott Courtyard. They have two computers in the lobby for laptopless guests like me to use. I had a little time between wedding events so I thought I would do a little blogging. I typed in the URL for my blog and hit the Enter key. But, instead of seeing my familiar home page I got a message box saying that my site was blocked. It didn't like the word 'hatemongers' in my blogroll. Thanks to the "crack young staff" of Hatemongers Quarterly I am banned in Dallas (at least I'm banned at the Marriott Courtyard).

Message to the creators of site blocking software: It's not the word 'hatemongers' that's bad, it's the hatemongers and the practice of mongering hate. Would you ban the word 'racists' because racists are generally bad people? Would you ban the word 'killers' because killers are generally bad people? Would you block an opinion piece at a major news site because it describes fringe elements on the political left or right as hatemongers? Are you an imbecile?

The only justification I can imagine for having site blocking software on computers is to prevent young children from viewing inappropriate material. But, how many children check in to hotels without being accompanied by adults?

In another hotel the lobby computer didn't choke on the word 'hatemongers', but it wouldn't allow me to send an e-mail message. All I could do was read my messages. I think it was because it lacked some version of Java.

As I said above, I may have to break down and get a laptop -- or just quit traveling.

---