Showing posts with label ktlk am 1150. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ktlk am 1150. Show all posts

Sunday, June 28, 2009

It gets more colorful at 3:54.




First heard by me today on The Week According to Frangela on KTLK AM 1150, during Frangela's beloved segment, "Professional Idiot of the Week":


"Slavery was evil, there's no question about that. But you know what? If it hadn't happened, where would you be right now? If your ancestors hadn't come over here for whatever reason, where would you be right now? You'd be floating down a river in Rwanda in pieces. Or maybe you'd be chased down by machete-wielding Janjaweed militia in the Sudan. Or starving under Robert Mugabe.

"Hey, ingrates. Get on your knees. Kiss the American dirt beneath you. And, please, shut up."


- Jim Quinn, from the June 24 edition of Clear Channel's The War Room with Quinn and Rose



There is so much nonsense to unpack in Jim Quinn's statement, including 1) most slaves in the Americas came from Western Africa, which does not include Rwanda, the Sudan, or Robert Mugabe's Zimbabwe; and 2) most black people born in the United States have non-African ancestry as well, often due to the owners raping their ancestors. So, despite Jim Quinn's penchant for the one-drop rule, in a parallel universe without centuries of slavery throughout the Western hemisphere, we ungrateful black people could have been living in Europe, Asia, Africa, Australia, the South Pacific, pretty much anywhere. Correspondingly, many allegedly white people in that same parallel universe could find themselves living in Senegal, Ghana, Nigeria or picking diamonds in Sierra Leone, all homes of their hidden ancestors.

.

Saturday, January 12, 2008

I Remember!


Here's what was making me giggle yesterday: Adrian Grenier [Verbed] The [Noun] Out Of Our Commenters, from Defamer.

And subsequently the comments that follow this: Foxy Brown's Latest Victim Brilliantly Articulates Our Feelings About Celebrity, from Gawker.

Here's what's making me giggle, nay guffaw, right now: Frangela on KTLK AM 1150.

.

Thursday, September 20, 2007

Visual Semantics, or, Why I don't listen to KTLK on weekdays from 3 to 7 pm


I got stressed out this afternoon when heard this bleepity-bleep on "Progressive Talk" radio, Mark "Mr. K" Germain, pictured above. He doesn't understand why black people (and sane people) are so upset over the situation in Jena. He feels that hanging nooses on a "white tree" in the South is freedom of speech, and not an actionable crime.

You know I had to call in. Apparently, everyone else listening in the Los Angeles area shared my passion, because the phone line was busy for at least an hour. So I choose to yell my radio between dialing attempts.

I am so tired of this fool talking wrong and strong on his self-titled program. Mr. Germain had no idea what was really going on in Jena. He read one small article on the situation and thought the entire rally and march was about three nooses and a school fight. People actually had to call in and tell him to read the Newsweek article that gives more details on the situation. He actually had the nerve to state that he had the right to walk through Inglewood with a noose since it's not a crime; it's free speech. In the words of Cedric the Entertainer in The Original Kings of Comedy, I wish that bleepity-bleep would. I doubt he'd be welcomed with flowers and candy. Then we Angelenos could get a replacement for the 3-7 slot on KTLK. Someone who does real research on topics and speak with understanding and sensitivity, instead of filling his four hours with ignorance and misinformation.

All Mr. Germain had to do was watch this video. It's not that hard! Seriously.

Sunday, July 01, 2007

"Semantics": Yet another lesson from a person of a certain privileged class



On Friday I had another radio show call-in experience. This one was less productive that the previous, if that can be believed.

The host, who was filling in for the regular show from noon to 3pm, was talking about the controversial immigration bill that died in the Senate this week.

He kept going on about his grandparents leaving Poland and coming to the United States. Because somehow they were more justified in coming here then than someone coming here now because they had the right papers. But he never described what the process was that his grandparents had to go through, nor did he accurately or fairly compare it to the processes that immigrants to the United States go through now. One would imagine if the process were easier today, then people would keep coming here and/or staying here illegally. He even admitted that the bureaucracy of the Department of Homeland Security and the INS is intractable.

He also kept calling people "illegals," and pretty much confined the source of the problem to people entering the southern border of the United States from Mexico and Central America.

I called in and waited on the phone for about a half-hour. I told him, and the screener a half-hour earlier, "I agree with what most of the host is saying, however I wish he would not say it such a racist way." The host then exploded, screeching, "You're calling me a racist?!" I explained that I did not say that, but that some of the things he was saying were racist. In specific, calling undocumented immigrants "illegals." He laughed derisively at me, said we were talking about the same thing, and asked why I was arguing over semantics. I told him it was not the same thing: different cultures talk about these people in different ways, and the choice of words makes a difference.

I wanted to then respond to some comments the host had made about assimilation, including one about how when his formerly Polish grandparents immigrated to the United States, they adopted American customs. They didn't kneel down and pray facing Poland five times a day. Okay, so much wrong with that analogy. He was inaccurately comparing a national ancestry (Polish) with a religion (Islam). Plus, most Muslim people are not from Mecca. Praying to the city is a practice of their religion, not a practice of patriotism Additionally, there are many Muslims in America who are born in America. Even if they weren't born here, being American and being Muslim are not dichotomous traits; one can do both very well.

I also wanted to point out that "illegals" and "illegal immigrants" are terms used mostly on English-speaking American media outlets. "Indocumentados," or "the undocumented" is the preferred term in the Spanish-speaking American media that I consume. I mostly watch Noticias and Despierta America on Univision, but that's enough for me to make a sweeping generalization of the phrases used in Spanish-language programming shown in the United States. Now about the lack of brown people on Univision...well, that is another post for another time.

But I didn't get to say any of those things. The host ended our conversation, not with an "I appreciate the call" like Ed Schultz does, but by screaming that I was calling him a racist, and then moving onto the next caller without so much as a "Good-bye." Like I expected anything different. Then he asked the next caller if he could believe what I had said, and told the caller that I was "imbecilic." Nice!

This has been at least the second time that a white American male has told me essentially that words don't matter. The first time was in reference to the Michael Richards incident. That first person also didn't fully understand why Dave Chappelle left his show on Comedy Central. I tried to explain it to him, about the protectiveness Dave felt toward his humor, especially over the racial setups. But he really wasn't getting it. He didn't see why a black comedian, or any nonwhite comedian on Comedy Central, should have any issues that are different than those of the white males most often featured on the network.

It's always nice when people who have most likely never experienced repeated acts of racism, sexism or other bigotry think they know more than those people who have. There is a difference between calling someone "an illegal" and calling someone "undocumented." There is a reason cultured people use certain words instead of others. We don't call black people "colored" anymore. Although... Oy. Someone did call me colored last weekend. He was passing by the outdoor event I was volunteering at on Saturday. As I was walking on the street from my car back to the other volunteers, he said to me, "You're the only colored girl I saw in there." I responded with an, "Uh..." and kept moving right along.

Why didn't I give him a lengthier, more poignant reply? Well, one, the man was pushing a shopping cart down the street, and it wasn't full of groceries. Two, he looked about twice my age. Three, he was also black. Four, it was 2007. All of that combined warranted an "Uh" from me.

For more forays into people who need to get a clue, please read Racism as a Lifestyle Choice, by Racialicious Special Correspondent Latoya Peterson:


Listening to people rationalize their racism is both hilarious and infuriating.

This week, Carmen posted a link to a RaceWire posting about an article that explored one white woman’s journey into racism.

Initially I viewed the post with skepticism. My neighbors made me racist? Are you kidding? I perused the article, made a comment, and thought that would be the end of that. However, the rationalization of racist behavior continued with TAN pointing me toward a Washington City Paper article I had skipped last week, once again featuring a white woman spinning the same “woe-is-me, I-turned-into-a-racist completely by accident” spiel.

Okay, so now there are two white women, taking their “Oops, I did it (racism) again” moments to the press. Is this indicative of a trend? I decided to re-examine the two pieces with a more objective eye. ...

...Reading both of their pieces, I was struck by the idea that this may be a new form of privilege - two women who openly proclaimed their racism and benefited from it with exposure, media attention, and a sympathetic ear from other whites. Other whites who have the best of intentions, but damn it, these brown people make it so hard NOT to be racist.

Or maybe I am struggling with my racist thoughts because I am unable to muster up sympathy for white people struggling with their inner racism. Maybe I’m just weary of dealing with people who missed the point of Michael Richards’ rant - it wasn’t about the n-word, it was about the noose and fork reference. Maybe I am tired of listening to white people talk about how much they hate themselves or their past deeds, but ultimately have nothing come from the conversation besides a slight lessening of white guilt.

Or maybe I’m just racist because I generalize white people...


FYI, I don't generalize any of you readers. You are all individuals to me, regardless of your color, gender, location, or sexual orientation. I'm not sure about you furries, though. You're going to have to take that elsewhere.