Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

We ought to give Dog a second chance (Daily Trojan)
Daily Trojan ^ | 11/13/2007 | Joshua Sharp

Posted on 11/13/2007 12:30:44 AM PST by panther33

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-65 last
To: Albion Wilde

Thanks. Just one thing. They forgot to inform the owners of this law.


51 posted on 11/13/2007 8:41:52 AM PST by freekitty ((May the eagles long fly our beautiful and free American sky.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: panther33

Who’s this “we”? Whether his TV show continues is between him and the network.


52 posted on 11/13/2007 9:06:56 AM PST by Tax-chick ("How inscrutable are His judgments and how unsearchable His ways!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gridlock
The fact is, Mr. Dog’s public act, which has made him a lot of money, requires him to use coarse language and racial slurs from time to time. He was merely pointing out to his son that he did not want somebody in the family making a big deal out of it every time he did so. This is a perfectly reasonable position and really has nothing to do with racial denigration or the individual girl involved.

Forgive me for using your well-meaning post as an example of the problems we have with language in today's media-saturated culture, but regardless of your good intentions, several of the things you said as fact simply can't be proven true.

First, you claim as fact that his profession "requires him to use coarse language and racial slurs from time to time." This statement is clearly not fact, it is one opinion among many. The case can certainly be made that he can effectively catch criminals without using bad language — it's probable that only an authoritative tone of voice when he commands them to surrender will work just as well.

Next your post says, "He was merely pointing out to his son that he did not want somebody in the family making a big deal out of it every time he did so. This is a perfectly reasonable position and really has nothing to do with racial denigration or the individual girl involved." Again, absolutist words — "merely", "perfectly", "really", "nothing" — are used to describe a situation with many shades of gray.

I'm not trying to pick on you; I believe most of us here understand that your remarks were made in the vernacular, everyday language most of us use. I'm trying to make a point about language usage. Dog was doing the same thing — using his everyday frame of reference. However, most people today do recognize the sensitivity of the n-word, as Dog himself did. That's where this situation breaks down.

The word is a bad word. Dog's other frequent frame of reference, "m****rf****r, is a terrible image that should offend virtually everyone, and he uses that one during almost every bust against a male perpetrator, without losing his show. But the n-word is directed at an oppressed people who have been freed only in stages, thus it has an extensive political lobby backing it up.

The n-word is a particularly offensive word, and it's hard to make the case that the person who uses it, black or white, isn't accountable for offensive speech aimed at a person's race rather than their character. When he called her a "whore", nobody got upset. This word was understood to mean that he doubted her character as being a person who would sell a thing of great value cheap. As it turns out, she did encourage Tucker to do just that, in selling out his own father at any price.

But Dog's specific use of the n-word in this situation implied, without stating it, that most black people are persons of bad character; or that her bad character was somehow associated with the fact that she is black. That's where he went off the rails. Even if he had said, "Son, in my experience some black people in high-pressure situations with white people can be suspicious that everything we do is about race, and she seems a little insecure this way, and this will cause us trouble," it would have still caused a firestorm, but would have been harder for Tucker and the girlfriend to use against him. He was impatiently using the n-word to try to telegraph all of that in shorthand, instead of sitting down with his son and having a counseling talk face-to-face, and it didn't work out for him.

53 posted on 11/13/2007 9:13:56 AM PST by Albion Wilde (America: “the most benign hegemon in history.”—Mark Steyn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Mohito Loe
Maybe, he did kill someone and go to jail for it. That’s why he can’t carry a gun and only goes after mostly small-time or safer convicts.

He didn't do the killing, but was an accessory after the fact, having been part of the criminal robbery during which the murder was committed by someone else in his gang.

54 posted on 11/13/2007 9:16:29 AM PST by Albion Wilde (America: “the most benign hegemon in history.”—Mark Steyn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Mohito Loe
It makes me uncomfortable when they pray one minute and sling the “MF” word a few seconds later. It’s bleeped out, but there is no doubt what he is saying. Still, he’s less scary than his wife.

LOL!! I'm surprised she hasn't put someone's eye out with those things. Suddenly meeting up with her must be like having the air bag go off.

55 posted on 11/13/2007 9:18:45 AM PST by Albion Wilde (America: “the most benign hegemon in history.”—Mark Steyn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick
Who’s this “we”? Whether his TV show continues is between him and the network.

We = loyal viewers

You're correct to an extent, but it's perfectly legitimate for his viewers to discuss (and advocate) for/against his return to television.

Let's get him back on the streets and fighting crime. His time on Earth is best spent doing that, not sitting in the courtroom of public opinion or negotiating a reduced deal with A&E.

56 posted on 11/13/2007 10:44:30 AM PST by panther33 (USC Trojan -- Fight On!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: panther33
I’ll be on campus tomorrow and will try and grab a hard copy of the paper myself.

God finds people where they are at.
Dog was in a bad place, never had the benefit of the great education you are getting and he is rough as a person.

I think if his cable channel doesn’t pick up his show, that some other channel who is smart will. He makes cable money.

I think he is human and that he was never trying to say the N word on his own in public, it took the secret recording in privacy to bring it out.
He at least had the good taste to keep it away in public to not hurt feelings.
I think if he feels bad and grows from this to speak less foul things, then good for him as well.

He’s a guy out of prison who took up bounty hunting and got himself a cable show, we should NOT expect to find Jay Leno or Henry Kissinger there.

57 posted on 11/13/2007 10:52:23 AM PST by A CA Guy (God Bless America, God bless and keep safe our fighting men and women.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Albion Wilde
The case can certainly be made that he can effectively catch criminals without using bad language — it's probable that only an authoritative tone of voice when he commands them to surrender will work just as well.

Well, he is less in the catching criminals business and more in the entertainment business, these days. He has made quite a lot of money by projecting a certain public persona. That persona is coarse and uses foul language and slurs as a matter of course. He is in a very unusual position in that using the N-word really is part of what makes him successful in his field.

Such is the state of our culture.

58 posted on 11/13/2007 11:08:05 AM PST by gridlock (Recycling is the new Religion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Albion Wilde
He was impatiently using the n-word to try to telegraph all of that in shorthand, instead of sitting down with his son and having a counseling talk face-to-face, and it didn't work out for him.

Having a one-sided conversation like this into an answering machine is just stupid. I will grant you that.

59 posted on 11/13/2007 11:09:19 AM PST by gridlock (Recycling is the new Religion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: panther33
it's perfectly legitimate for his viewers to discuss (and advocate) for/against his return to television.

That's true. However, I also think it's legitimate for the network to conclude, based on its commercial evaluation, that he's better off doing his job without their cameras.

60 posted on 11/13/2007 11:27:49 AM PST by Tax-chick ("How inscrutable are His judgments and how unsearchable His ways!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: panther33

Chapman is viewed as a cartoon character by those in the industry. Ask one of them, they’ll tell you the truth.

He and his wife should return to the trailer park that spawned them.


61 posted on 11/13/2007 11:29:53 AM PST by Badeye (That Karma thing keeps coming around, eh Sally? (chuckle))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gridlock
He is in a very unusual position in that using the N-word really is part of what makes him successful in his field.

I vehemently do not agree with you on that.

62 posted on 11/13/2007 1:24:19 PM PST by Albion Wilde (America: “the most benign hegemon in history.”—Mark Steyn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: Albion Wilde

Well, since he is the only bounty hunter making big bucks on TV these days, and he happens to be vulgar and rough, I think it is a fair inference that being vulgar and rough is part of his commercial appeal, and thus his success.

Using the N-word, and apparently other vulgarities, is part of that success.

I don’t like it, but there it is. People tune in to see that sort of thing.


63 posted on 11/13/2007 1:31:33 PM PST by gridlock (Recycling is the new Religion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: Albion Wilde
Your last paragraph of your lecture is so stupid that surely you yourself do not believe it. Also, you assuming to read Dog’s mind as to what he was implying is silly. You just want to agitate.
64 posted on 11/15/2007 7:49:56 AM PST by apocalypto
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: apocalypto
Your last paragraph of your lecture is so stupid that surely you yourself do not believe it. Also, you assuming to read Dog’s mind as to what he was implying is silly. You just want to agitate.

Actually, newbie, I stand by every word of it.

65 posted on 11/15/2007 11:13:10 AM PST by Albion Wilde (America: “the most benign hegemon in history.”—Mark Steyn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-65 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson