That depends on how easily offended you are. I've been one of three white people in a comedy club with a black comic and an otherwise black audience (the other two were also at my table), and we got a little grief, but it struck me as good-natured. We weren't called names or insulted.
If you draw 0-100 scale for "offensive," Richards' rant was a hell of a lot closer to the top end than anything I've heard from black comics. There is a valid point that white comics can get away with about a 20 and black comics can get away with about a 40, but that's no defense for Richards, who hit at least an 80.
The problem is many of us here are not making excuses for Michael Richard's outburst (I said that he went for the jugular and he does claim a brief victory, although it was nothing to celebrate).
I have repeatedly pointed out the double standard in the case and the aftermath.
If you use an epithet at someone on the street and he punches you in the mouth, was he provoked? Yes. Was his (the hypothetical man on the street's) response justified? Violence in response to language?
The hecklers provoked the response (they repeatedly interrupted the show). In turn, Michael Richards pushed their buttons by using racially insensitive imagery and language. As a response they responded with epithets. Was their response JUSTIFIED? Hate speech in return for hate speech?
They are no better in their hearts. And the activist at the press conference who blamed the Jews for the corporations' use of the n word in the popular movies and music of today also has a heart full of racist hate.