Michael Richards racist, act, what was it really? and should he be sued for it?
 

For those who do not know, Michael Richards (aka Kramer on Seinfeld) went into a serious racial tirade after being heckled while on stage in an LA comedy club.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uCF9D...elated&search=

Now what I see at first is a man losing it, but we don't know what started it, not that it matters.

I thought, well maybe this is an Andy Kaufman type setup. Because what got me was the end where he says "you see, there's still those words.... those words..." and throughout "they're going to arrest me for calling a black man a nigger"... "you see you see this shocks you.... you see what's buried beneath you all...."

Even in his Dave Letterman appology, he takes subtle jabs at "the rage" "I'll get to the force shield, why the rage is in any of us.... why the trash takes place.... and so on...."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d5dkHMHVJjU

This just seemed like an Andy Kaufmanesque type setup to prove a point, to get somewhere..... (keep in mind it was Letterman that pushed the Kaufman routines)

But then today..... Gloria Allred that feministic lawyer, decides to discuss suing, the people who heckled him come out and talk about how hurt they are.... how they need "restitution"..... how a retired judge believes that Richards should pay..... how if Richards had been a kid and threw a rock through a window and broke it he would be expected to pay...... (WTF was with that analogy Gloria.... he didn't throw rocks). The heckler is now saying our speech needs to be limited.... not free....

Perhaps this is all to prove a point... perhaps not.....

My true feelings are this.... he reacted to heckling, right or not, act or not, trying to prove a point or not, racist and meant it or not..... doesn't fucking matter... he has the right to say those words in this country.

The public has the right to buy or not his product. Noone but the venue's owner has the right to censor what this man says.... the owner and the whole entertainment industry can boycott him and tell him they don't want him to be on their stage, in their movies or tv shows. They have that right.

We do not have the right to censor his speech.

Now what will be interesting to see is the bullshit arguments that we do have that right..... that we should limit speech, (but WHO determines then what shall be censored, what's offensive and to whom is it offending.... and what if it offends someone but the majority just ignore it?).

NO ONE HAS THE RIGHT TO CENSOR ANOTHER..... you can take away their venue and make them find a new one..... but you can not silence or fine or punish people because they offend, solely with words.

And before anyone comes up with the FCC BS.... he wasn't covered by them....

He didn't incite any riots, and he didn't threaten anyone......

Calling people names, while stupid, is not illegal.

well, yeah he kinda seemed like he was trying to prove a point.

like "You can say stuff that makes me upset, and disrespects me, well yeah, I can do the same, how do you like it when I call you a nigger? Interrupting my show is about the most disrespectful thing you can do to a comic, so calling you that is my equal"


I don't even think this was a personal vendetta between 2 people, I think it was a clash of roles, a heckler vs a comic, akin to racist to a black man.

Not making excuses, not saying he's right in what he did, but the comments he muttered beneath his breath between the insults do kinda put the question marks above my head.

I dunno, he probably did kill his career, but he's still a big man for making his apology.

From his "Wiki" Bio

LINK: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Richards

So, someone who produced and directed shows dealing with race relations for the US Army, is now going to be racist...... I truly believe more and more it's an Andy Kaufmanesque set-up, to prove some point, but it failed miserably and isn't producing the results he wanted.... or maybe it has.

Let us remember that Richards, himself, has stated that he was part of one of Kaufmn's biggest hoaxes "the FRIDAYS take over" (LINK) http://andykaufman.jvlnet.com/fridays.htm

I thought it was funny.

And I'm what he'd call a nigger.

Here's the link I needed with Gloria Allred and the "victims".... LINK URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15852020/


Well duh, you find something offensive, you have the right to walk out, maybe ask for your money back......

WTF??????? Next time I get insulted at work by someone detoxing or a driver who flips me off, or whatever..... I want you as my attorney.... I want you suing people because of "the pain they inflicted on me".... can we include the people on this forum who call me names? What about retroactive to grade school?

And this relates to Michael Richards how? Because he didn't know how to contact these 2 men to appologize personally?

Wow..... see what happens when we take this "I find..... offensive and I want the power to stop it...." too far?

Pan6467 is an asshole, a prick, an idiot, and a Pansy. I love free speech :)

seriously though, I agree with you 100%.

Say whatever you want to. I might not like it, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.

Sorry bud, you can't do that here on TFP.

I find it funny in the "Andy Kaufman, ironic, point out what's wrong with society and push the envelope way".... but because I am of a caucasian pigment, I must be racist.

You finding it funny must make you a race traitor because obviously the 2 men who have hired Gloria Allred as their lawyer, are normal everyday black men proud of their race and are devestated by what was said... as any black person should be.

In the small chance you arn't joking, I will add that I am being sarcastic, and I think pan and everyone else will understand that I am in no way calling pan any of those names I used above. Please don't sue me. :-P

Where's Gloria Allred's phone number?????? I' want justice, you have hurt my character and publicly disgraced me..... now I want my millions.

And if this was a set-up..... and Gloria wasn't in on it and Richards and the 2 men go on Letterman and reveal what it was.... won't that kind of destroy any credibility you have Gloria????????

Nah, I got it. I just wanted to take it up a notch on the irony and satirical scale.

Think about it. While everyone is espousing free speech and defending what Richards said, they seem to forget that we have strict rules about speech here on the TFP (i.e.- no, free speech is indeed, not free). So, I thought it poignant to point that out using your post as an example, especially in light of your comments.

My opinion, Richards crossed the line but I don't think he should be sued. That's just silly. Let the "market" dispense justice. His career, if not already over, is probably on the way out now after this incident. People should not give this guy anymore time or attention. He screwed up big time, got called out on it and should now be "paying for it". The was no Kaufman here, he freely admits that he lost his temper and went into a rage and lost it. If it wasn;t caught on tape, he probably wouldn't even have apologized (although that is completely speculatory on my part).

If Kaufman would have done it, I would have been laughing out loud. Kramer isn't funny, so I really don't care. The thing is: if he is required to apologize for racism, then everyone should be required to apologize for racism. While I'd love to live in a country where every racist is required to apologize, that would be a breach of free speech, so I really can't support it. Also, I don't think this is comparable to the old "yelling 'fire' in a crowded room' argument. He just blew his top. He's apologized, so now we wait for Jason Alexander to make horribly sexist remarks or for Julia Louis-Dreyfus to eat a baby. It must suck to be unfamous after being famous.

Ah, see Will, that is an interesting point. I don't think Richards or many people for that matter are REQUIRED to apologize, especially famous people. Which makes it even more interesting. Is Richards even truly sorry at all or did he aplogize as a means of damage control?

I think it is a calculated decision. He weighed the costs and benefits. (Same with Mel Gibson). Then concluded that it would be wise to apologize. Even his friend Jerry Seinfeld condemned his tirade.

That's why a lawsuit is silly. I think we the people are smarter than that. We can see through a person's insincerity (in theory at least). Vote with your feet, vote with your wallet to show you displeasure, disapproval what-have-you.

Important that he follow his words with deeds..... So what she's saying is she wants her clients to be lynched by Kramer????

What I find really ironic here is the fact that everyone gets pissed off about the fact that a white man says "nigger", but nobody including many black people are offended when a black rapper has a song filled with the word. In fact those songs seem to sell rather well.

I propose that Kramer should sue the two men for their racist view-point damaging his reputation.

It might not be illegal, but still there is no reason to be racist... we are in the 21rst century, its time to forget skin color or religion... its time to realize we are all the same...

While I agree with what you're saying, it's never going to happen. I personally don't think he should be sued for it, but anyone will do anything for a quick buck nowadays. Couldn't Richards essentially sue them for being called a "cracker-ass motherfucker"? Or am I trying too hard in pointing out the hypocrisy?

Does anyone remember that old Saturday Night Live imitation called Fridays, and the incident with Andy Kaufman and Michael Richards...?

...aren't the Seinfeld episodes coming out on DVD soon...?

...can you say "publicity stunt?"

Richards handled it poorly. Period. I don't think his initial comments on stage were unwarrented, because its obvious it was a reaction to being provoked. The problem is he didn't do anything right then and there to "make it funny again." He just stood there and kept going back and forth with the dude in the audience calling eachother names, bad form.

If he was able to turn it around and go into an improv routine that had to do with the situation he was forced into, win the crowd over, and actually get laughs out of it, the whole thing would have died right there in the club. He didn't (or is not good enough to) do that, and the inevidible lawsuit is now forthcoming. A good comedian can make mincemeat out of a heckler and never look back, I guess Richards can't.

Allred needs a big steaming cup of STFU.

This might be a bit of a threadjack, but you CAN sue for purely emotional distress. However, you'd need to get a team of shrinks to testify that you'd suffered some sort of impairment to your ability to live a happy and successful life as a result of the emotional injury, i.e. developed an anxiety disorder or depression or something. These guys don't have a shot in hell, unless they find a jury who wants to punish him for coming off as racist. I guess it's possible, but if they are serious, it seems likely it'll be settled before trial anyway.

I'd just heard the highlights previous to this thread. I hadn't heard any of the sotto voce commentary by Richards. I don't know that the whole thing was staged a la Kaufman, but he certainly seems MUCH more cognizant of what he was doing than, say, Mel Gibson did when he went on his anit-Semitic tirade. Certainly makes me wonder what the real point of it all was. Thanks for the links, Pan.

That's interesting that you point that out, SirLance. I've seen it before, but I had forgotten (or never realized) that that was Richards in that sketch. I don't think Richards is quite on the same level as Kaufman, so I don't think this is some huge elaborately planned scheme of his, but I could imagine that being the case if it were Kaufman in this current scandal instead of Richards...

here's the video for anyone who hasn't seen it:

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/AkbjvUAdKBc"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/AkbjvUAdKBc" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

Yeah, this event mostly shows that he doesn't seem to be that good at his job, if that's how he deals with hecklers.

The act itself is racist, since he used racial epithets. I don't know if that means he's racist thought, he might have been simply trying to say hurtful things to the hecklers to shut them up (which failed quite spectacularly). That doesn't mean he might not be racist, but it's not clear to me what he is.

In any case, he certainly mishandled it. But hey, it provided him with some free publicity. I didn't even remember his real name until this!

I can understand why people would be upset over this, but I can't understand why they need money for it.

I wonder if Diane Sawyer will grill him or if she reserves that seat for the other kinds of bigots in the world,..anti-semites.

I listened to a Damon Wayons routine this morning on Sirius where he was referring to Martin Luther King Jr's wife calling MLK a nigger. The audience roared with laughter every time Wayans said nigger. It was radio so I can't be sure, but I'd bet a good number of people in the audience were black.

Next he started stereotypical jokes about Indians. Everyone remained laughing.

Sure Wayons was going for laughs and Richards was melting down. There is a big difference in the two situations, but if nigger is such an end all bad word, why tolerate anyone using it for entertainment any more than using it to spread hate and bigotry?

If anyone really wants to use the court system to stop racial wrongdoing, go after people who really are violating civil rights rather than a washed up comedian.

Well, I suppose I'm a traitor to my race then. Whatever happened to "Sticks and stones may break my bones but words can never hurt me!"? IMHO, the suit is just silly. What are they going to sue him for, anyway? I've heard my fair share of racist jokes while living in the South. If I could run off and sue everyone who ever told a racist joke, then I'd make Bill Gates look like a pauper.

Many African-American comedians are blatantly racist (Such as Dave Chapelle and D.L. Hughley), yet you never hear a word of protest. So I don't understand the big deal when a non-minority does it.

<a href="http://www.avenueq.com/video/racist_high.ram">Everyone's a little bit racist.</a>

Infinite_Loser is going to lead the most stress-free life of any of us. When is the last time you saw a white person going ballistic because someone called him a "cracker?" That's what Richards was called by one of his hecklers after he went ballistic. However, it just doesn't seem to bother whites.

If blacks have a sense of their own worth, they eventually won't care when someone uses the word "nigger." Then it will no longer be any fun for racists to say, and it will fade into oblivion.

Richards going off was cringeworthy. Gloria Allred grinning on TV this morning was barfworthy. The most dangerous job in America is trying to get between her and a television camera. In her so-called mind, getting your feelings hurt is no different than breaking someone's window. Right.

If we could just get her to sue the Taliban and some Iranian mullahs, world peace would be at hand. :rolleyes:

:lol: Go Crack! I started laughing heartily when I saw your sarcasm. :D

(I have called him worse on PMS.) Shh dont tell.

To each their own. A faux pas to be sure, hurtfull to his career? Probably. Have the right to free speech? Absolutely.

It makes me so happy that someone else knows this as well. Something is only as offensive as ytou allow it to be. Instead of giving a very old and misused word power, people should just let it go and realize that some people are racist assholes, and taking away their power is more fun than playing at the superbowl with Joe Montana. How do you take away the power of racists? 1) surround them with liberals or 2) rendering their racist rhetoric useless 3) lynchin. I prefer 1 or 2.

Richards is lucky he didn't get his ass kicked. What an absolute asshole. He's lucky he had a pretty nice crowd, otherwise he surely would've got beaten the hell up.

The fact that he's being sued is stupid, yet typical. I think he just deserves a nice, big kick in the face.

I don't know. The more I think about it and watch it, the more I just think it is Andy Kaufmanesque.

No, it isn't funny, not everything Kaufman did was funny. Kaufman always pushed the norms of society and would do the stupidest, whacked out things just to prove a point. Other comics did also: Kovacs, Dangerfield (that's why he was underground for a very long time), Tom and Dick Smothers, and the list goes on.

To me the end of his "tirade" is extremely telling.... where he says "you see, there's still those words.... those words..." and throughout "they're going to arrest me for calling a black man a nigger"... "you see you see this shocks you.... you see what's buried beneath you all...."

I keep focussing on that. Because I truly like Michael Richards, he is not Kosmo Kramer and it's sad that's how people will refer to him. He is not Stanley Spadowski from Weird Al's UHF movie, he is not some make believe character. He is a real person. And the fact that no matter where he goes, what he does he will always be "Kramer" has to take a psychological toll on him.... It would anyone.

Do I support what he did? No. Do I think it is a work? Yes, and I believe had he not been "Kramer" and more known for his envelope pushing, people would realize his stand up and act is not far from Kaufman's. The sad reality is he isn't looked at as the type, he is looked at as "Kramer" and thus the reaction he tried to get and the point he was trying to make, fell flat.

As for lawsuits, well, Hell if we can sue for emotional damage, I'm suing everyone in grade school because they unrelentingly teased me about my size (height), I'm suing everyone I was in the Navy with because they teased me about being Einsteinish but having no common sense, I'm suing every freaking rednecked, NASCAR watching, beer guzzling, waitress ass grabbing, white man for the stereotype they have place on me. I'm suing every black person who has looked at me funny because of my race, I'm suing every woman I dated because they laughed at my size (in bed)........... Fuck it, I'm suing every God Damned mother fucking person on this shit assed world because somehow, someway they have offended me..... and if they haven't they gave birth to, married, dated, laughed or knew and never stopped someone who did emotionally damage and offend me in some way.....

You know what.... fuck, I probably will have to sue any judge that hears the case, because they are idiots for letting it get that far, any lawyer representing me, their greedy assed mother fuckers who are just going to rob me of any winnings, my parents for having me, because they could have gotten an abortion and saved me from this Hell,.......

In the end, I have to sue my own Goddamned mother fucking son of bitch ass because I have done more emotional, psychological, and physical harm to myself because of the idiotic choices I've made than all other people on this planet combined.

Fuck it.... too much work, and besides I don't want everyone to know what a sorry asshole I truly am.

All i am going to say is, I am SO happy for the video capture technology in cellphones and digital cams- they have given us video insights into events that would otherwise have been nothing more than "he said, she said" with the sole reliance on witness accounts.

There have been so many events that would possibly have remained speculation, gossip, and eyewitness sound bytes had it not been for this technology.

That being said, I don't think he's a racist, he just has poor judgment of "pushing the envelope", and isn't a very good stand-up comedian in general. I don't know why anyone is drawing any parallels or making any references to the late, great comedy legend Andy Kaufman. Michael Richards couldn't be like Andy Kaufman in his dreams.

And unless he's an incredibly good actor (and i've watched enough Seinfeld to say that he isn't), it's really hard to fake the nervous, sad, shaky and ashamed discomfort that was present in his voice when talking to David Letterman. He just made a terrible error in judgment on what he thought was "push the envelope for humor", and went way into "just insulting people" because he was losing it.

If it is then Richards is even dumber than I thought. Kaufman could get away with crap like that because the entire country hadn't collectively decided to work very hard at getting offended at the slightest opportunity. In today's environment, that kind of thing is not going to prove a point, it's only going to deep-six your career.

What are the grounds for this lawsuit. The comedy club refunded everyone's money, no questions asked. These people aren't out anything. If you can successfully sue because someone hurt your delicate feelings, that's awesome. I'll just start suing anyone who makes me feel bad. I'll be rich, as long as I can avoid making someone else sniffle.

Careful. They'll counter sue for stereotyping them white trash.

it's funny how problematic it can be to do a conceptual action.

andy kaufman was able to do such actions--more retrospectively than in real time, if you remember (the wrestling thing was not seen at the time as "o look at the interesting conceptual action being undertaken" but rather as "i think andy kaufman has gone nuts and turned into an asshole")---because he was constructed as a comedian who would do conceptual actions. the various songs and films about his life that "let you in on the joke" had no small role in setting this up...which of course has the effect of rendering the actions toothless because people know up front what to expect. so now, were andy kaufman still alive (say) the space for doing the kind of work that he was doing would be erased. it's lilke gertrude stein says: new stuff--particularly politically charged new work--is rejected, rejected--then accepted as "beautiful"--and once accepted as "beautiful" it loooses any meningful power to provoke, to challenge.
so andy kaufman's work is now "beautiful"....

in america in particular, all art is entertainment.
this categorization functions to enable audiences to be as lazy and smug as they like.
the "right" to be "entertained" is absolute.
people want everything handed to them.
if they encounter an art object of any kind---a performance piece, a cube---they dont want to work, they dont want to think--they want everything clearly labelled---"THIS IS A PIECE OF CONCEPTUAL ART SO THINK ABOUT IT THIS WAY" or "THIS IS A PIECE OF REPRESENTATIONAL ART SO DONT WORRY ABOUT METAGAMES"

i like the effect michael richard's action has had.
i do not know what that action was.
but it is pretty obvious that its ability to provoke and disturb is a function of this not knowing.
the responses in this thread are neatly divided along lines determined by intepretations of genre.
i think this conflict over genre is good, and i would hope that the status of the action remains ambiguous for as long as possible--and i would hope that people are fed ex-post facto lies about intent. irritation provoked by the inability to classify is exemplary. all explanations of this action should be shallow, obviously false. they should function to irritate. maybe that way, eventually, the problem of classification will come up. maybe that way, a potentially interesting conversation about contemporary forms of racism could spin out. actions geared around american racism loose any possible interest once they are presented as resolved. american racism is not a spectator sport. it makes no sense to be able to watch actions involving it unfold in an unproblematic manner for you on a screen or on a stage as if you the spectator are positioned outside it, thinking de facto "phew, glad that shit is over with..."

it isn't over with.

what i expect, however, is that there will be some "resolution" handed you at some point that will enable this to be fit into one place or another, and with that the action will loose its ability to provoke or even interest, and it will begin its tumble into the massive debris field of the past.

the only sure thing in this is that gloria allred loves seeing gloria allred on camera.
the lawsuit is about getting gloria allred on camera.
her action speaks to the desire for one-dimensional "entertainment"
the suit is about the fact that it is michael richards who performed the action, whether intended as such or not.
if an unknown had done exactly the same thing, gloria allred would nto be able to squeeze cameratime out of it, so there would be no lawsuit.

This situation has obviously been blown out of proportion but why is it that everyone here is so willing to equate the general sense of over-reaction to the racially charged side of things rather than the fact that he's a celebrity and everything that involves a celebrity is made into much more than it actually it - - in fact, that's pretty much how a celebrity becomes a celebrity.

Surely you can liken all of this to a Kauffman-esque skit but I just can't see how this situation can be interpreted as anything other than a person with command of a crowd shirking his responsibility to keep everything orderly whilst verbally attacking an audience member.

Well in actuality, you most certainly can censor another person and the ability to do so is basic and an intrinsic to our personal freedoms.

I can't see how suing for anything more than the ticket price is plausible but there certainly is a case to be made for going to a venue and being publicly ousted and embarrassed simply because of the color of your skin.

Regardless of who started it, heckling a comedian is rather common as is a verbal exchange between a heckled comedian and his hecklers. However, it's rather obvious that Richards, as the commander of the crowd, had the responsibility to keep things civil and not only did he shirk that responsibility but he verbally assaulted someone in the process of "losing it".

The extent to which he is monetarily responsible for the situation is a case for the lawyers involved but I can certainly see how the men in the crowd could sue Richards as well as the venue.

Seems to me like you did little more than skim the first few sentences of the first post. Simply put, your words are nonsensical as well as off-topic.

I have an internal war with myself every time I consider what I should have for lunch - how could anyone consider it remotely possible to organize an entire race of people to have a similar stance on anything? It isn't the responsibility of blacks to neutralize the power of racism by ignoring it - it's the responsibility of us all to respect the differences between every individual and our govt's job to protect us irregardless of those differences.

...if we build the world out of ridiculous concepts we should expect a ridiculous world...

The video from youtube starts out with Richards yelling at some heckler. So, suffice to say, this is another "You said, he said" kind of situation. The video doesn't show what started the whole mess.

The lesson I take from this is that Michael Richards isn't a talented Stand-up act.

Is his act funny? Who knows. I didn't even know he did stand up. But a talented comedien could've diffused the situation, or, if the hecklers were crossing the line and aggressively ruining the performance for the rest of the audience, he could've had them thrown out. Just by walking off the stage, he would've at least retained some dignity and left the bad reputation squarely in the laps of the hecklers.

Audiences will forgive tactless bits and private indescretions to a point, but lose your cool and break the Entertainer/Audience bond? His mainstream career is over. Pee Wee Herman has had an easier time returning to the spotlight than Michael Richards ever will.

I have stumbled upon quite possibly the funniest YTMND ever created:

http://captainoftheussinevitable.ytmnsfw.com/

NSFW! Mix of the rant and apology

I just want to add that I can understand how Mr. Richards can make those comments and not be racist. If I'm trying to get back at a man for pissing me off on stage, I would use words that I know will hurt. The most hurtful words I know are of racist connotation.

While I don't condone it, I totally believe when he says he not racist.

Richards (Kramer) probably remembers the Seinfeld episode where Jerry was heckled at the comedy club then went to the person's office to get even and heckle them at their job?:)

If the comedy clubs try to censure racially offensive language I guess guys like Mencia, etc.. will have to get new joke writers.

Mencia needs to get new joke writers either way.

Heckling is rude, obnoxious, and can be considered somewhat harrassing. I NEVER have sympathy for hecklers. I go through life pretty much with the attitude that we are supposed to follow here. If you don't like what you see, leave.

That said, the measure of a man is how well he deals with stressful situations. Apparantly Richard is not a very nice man. oh well.

I think hecklers ought to be tossed out of comedy clubs because they do tend to take the jokes away from the comedian that I paid to see. If I wanted to see some two bit, thinks he's funny, wannabe comedian I could stay home and listen to my 4 year old.

If you pick a fight with someone you don't really get much sympathy from me when that person hurts your feelings right back.

As a white person that KNOWS I will forever be a racist if I even think the *n* word to hard, I do find it offensive that the very same word is said by the people who are supposedly finding it offensive for me to say.

See I'm coming off sounding like I support the way Richard handled this situation, and that is not true. I don't. In fact if the lawsuite hadn't been brought up I would very much up in arms about a perfomer abusing his customers and not performing.

Racism is not illegal. Discrimination is, but even then only in specific areas, and only when federal money is involved. People in this country are allowed to say whatever the hell they want to unless such words could reasonably be expected to lead to harm of another.

It wouldn't surprise me if this heckler had baited Richard on purpose to cause just this reaction just so he could sue. Things happened pretty fast to be a coincidence I think.

Stand up comedians must be immune to heckling if they want to succeed in their line of work - it's no different for Michael Richards than it is for any other comedian, just because he was on a popular sitcom. He's not Kramer anymore, he's Michael Richards, stand up comedian, and he has to earn laughs just like every other standup has done.

Therefore, if he chooses to sabotage his career by shouting racial slurs to hecklers instead of overcoming the taunts of these same hecklers, then he will not be successful. This is the mark of a good comedian - the ability to deal with hecklers, and fire off the funny comments that will diffuse a heckler situation. And it doesn't matter how much PR Jerry Seinfeld does or Dave Letterman does, Michael Richards will not recover from this immense blunder.

As for using the "N" word over and over again - we all know that it is only acceptable for black comedians to use this term in comedy, don't we? It is so much a part of our history here in America that those of us who are white and have black friends would NEVER ever call them the "N" word, even if they call themselves or their friends that. There is too much history behind the term for it to be any different.

Michael Richards should not be sued - he has the right of free speech, just as every one of us has. But his career may well indeed suffer for it. And perhaps, that would be the best revenge. The right of free speech has a responsibility attached to it - a person is responsible for the things they say, and must bear the consequences of it.

The double standard is getting old. It's all ok or none of it's ok. If someone can say cracker or jew or whop or zipper head or whatever and it's ok; I can say nigger anyway I want and so can Richards. Any whining from the man suing Richards is a great display of hypocrisy.

People calling Richards a racist on you tube is so funny. What's even more funny is these people calling him ignorant OH THE IRONY.

Below is something written by a black man on Richard Pryor and his use of the word "nigger". I found this doing a search for Richard Pryor talking about his trip to Africa and how he had used the word up and till then. It's a very great article, I hope you read it, I've highlighted the thread relevent portions, but the whole thing is a good read.

LINK: http://www.popmatters.com/film/featu...ardpryor.shtml

Great article.

And the more I hear about the whole situation makes me beleive the whole thing was in fact staged. It's sad, really. What people will do to make a few bucks in DVD sales.

I think it's a pretty unfortunate situation. I do believe in the sincerity of Richards' apology and his assertion that he just "flipped out."

Then again, I always leave room for a little skepticism when it comes to celebrity "scandals."

As to whether he should be sued, I don't think that question is relevant. People can sue anyone they want when they feel they have been wronged and deserve restitution. I don't have an opinion on that.

While that may be the case, each time someone does use the camera and record something somewhere that has posted signage that says, "recording expressly prohibited" then they themselves are also breaking the law. I'm quite sure that the Laugh Factory has such signage, and again, for the very reasons to protect their "assets" of live shows and their ability to record and archive it for themselves.

as far as the hecklers are concerned, you don't go to see live stand up and NOT expect to get heckled. If you want to see a comedian and not get heckled go to a large venue and sit way in the back, not a small comedy club that seats a couple hundred people.

Absolutely, clearly Kramer lost his professionalism. I would like to see the original heckle that allegedly started the whole tirade response. But so far it appears that Kramer went overboard with some racial taunts and the audience responded and then Kramer went completely nuts and psycho.

Ah, well, give a man enough rope......

I've got an opinion on that. True it seems people can sue when they feel they've been wronged. However it is a terrible fact that people feel they should sue just because they get their shorts in a bunch.

Had Richards denied anyone a job, housing, healthcare, etc due to race, the victim should feel free to use our taxpayer supported judicial system to the fullest extent. In this case, Richards called someone a name that many find offensive. In this situation, let it go and move on.

This case probably wouldn't even make the top 1,000 of ridiculous law suits to be brought before a civil court judge next year. In light of that, I don't see the point in having much of an opinion on it one way or the other. So in a roundabout way, I guess I am agreeing with you.

I think it was racist, but I don't think he should be sued because of it.

To me, this is a non-issue.

People do this sort of stupid shit all the time. Sure it's wrong. Sure it's tasteless and offensive.

The fact that it was caught on video and broadcast to the world and the fact that he is someone moderately rich and famous are the only reason why this is even being talked about.

I am choosing to not to give a damn. I think we waste too many brain cells being titillated by things that really don't matter.

I agree. The next time a black, white, hispanic, jew, asian etc is insulted in any racial sense I'm going to them to shut the fuck up and stop being a whiny cry baby.

Maybe then one day we will all see ourselves as equal rather than those who have an agenda to profit in whatever way possible.

Maybe then racism will go away and we will only be left with words.

Percy, if this were just about racism I would agree with you.

This isn't about righting a wrong or looking at the underlying or even the surface causes of racism.

All this is is more celebrity titillation. This whole event isn't much different from Lindsay Lohan getting caught on tape calling Paris Hilton a cunt.

If I felt that taking Michael Richards to task was going to do anything to stop racism, I'd take the opportunity to discuss this.

I just don't see it.

So,....because someone is a celebrity they can't be a racist because,...people are waiting for them to say stupid things? Or they can be but it isnt inherently their fault because we all say racists things,...but don't have a camera in our faces 24/7?

If that were the case then why did half the Catholic world have to apologize to Jews for Mel Gibson right down to the holocaust. Even the archibishop in the city I live apologized for Mel Gibson.

Or is it just racism when the right culture and religion gets offended?

And if your not a racist for saying out loud racist statements, can you be a racist and not say racists statements outwardly in a public manner? And if so or not, how could one tell either way?

percy,

charlatan isn't disagreeing with you. he's simply not going to get into a serious discussion of kramer being a racist. i think he's just saying its irrelevant and (now I'm adding words) completely indeterminant based on what we know via the media. simmer down a touch.

To paraphrase:

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y29/pigglet/jackie.jpg

Thanks piglet. That's pretty much right.

Pigglet, I got the drift the first time from the source, but thanks anyways

And when did Charlatan make you his nigger? Just kidding :love: :love: :icare: :lol: :thumbsup: :D :icare:

Just being a cunt you know, no harm, no foul.

The only role this guy is gonna get now is something from a Mel Gibson flick :lol:

I don't disagree, I was speaking to the general notion of having such a technology and its use wherever something "worthwhile" might take place. As far as this instance in this club is concerned- sure, the person who taped it broke a rule if such a sign exists. I ignored that distinction because I didn't think of it, and probably wouldn't care enough to mention it, had I thought of it. lol

Watching it, at first it does seem like hes trying to be funny, and its a part of his routine. (Im keeping in mind the fact that the video starts after he goes batty.) So I think they were waiting for the punchline or the end of the bit. They also might have been laughing because the hecklers won and he was driven off the stage.

During his apology on Letterman, Jerry Seinfeld actually has to tell the audience to stop laughing. I think that might be the same thing - those members of the audience thought the apology was a skit of some sort or a joke. I use joke in two ways: it was meant to be funny or it was funny because he supposedly is apologetic, you know what I mean?

He looks unhinged and kind of drugged (sedatives? narcotics? something else?) during that bizarre appearance. Hes all jittery and not making much sense. Talking about force fields and trailing off... And the backdrop looks like a jail or a mental hospital. (Purposefully setup that way, to visually insinuate this guy isnt in his right mind?) He definitely cracked up at some point and whether hes medicated in some way or not isnt the issue.

Is he racist? Seems to be. Banned from the Laugh Factory? Good. Being sued? FOR CHRISTS SAKE! This isnt a legal matter. I wish people would stop filing lawsuits over things like this.

Look, I think Michael Richards is talented. I think he is genuinely regretful, but thats probably because hes sullied his public image, to say the least.

As for him being washed up - and Im talking pre-stand-up-breakdown - people said that about Julia Louis-Dreyfus (the Seinfeld curse thing) and she made a comeback.
He might have been able to do the same.
But he blew it with that blow out.

Jesse Jackson has chimed in now calling for a boycott of the DVDs that are being released. Jackson states that Kramer shouldn't make any money off of this. And yes Jackson said Kramer, not Richards. And I guess this means that Jerry, Elaine and George shouldn't get paid for the DVDs as well the way Jackson sees it. (I'd wager Seinfeld and Larry David are the only ones making any big money from it anyway). And this was after Richards went on Jackson's show to apologize so not only did Richards real name stick, Jackson must not have accepted the apology.

Shortly after this incident, Kenny Im The Real Kramer! Kramer* issued a statement asking the public to not confuse him with the character.
Jacksons words are bound to upset the real Kramer.



*For those of you who either arent into Seinfeld or havent heard of this dude: Kramer is based on Kenny Kramer, who has been trying to capitalize on his Kramerness for years.

I just wanted to post this as an example of a way in which someone can properly deal with a heckler, and make a joke out of it, and not flip out at the crowd. This is from the Dane Cook CD, and there's a heckler you can audibly hear in the background and he replies with:

"Shut up. Seriously. shut up. Shut your fucking mouth. Don't point back at me. I'll throw you out. SHUT up."

Then the crowd gets awkwardly silent after that and Dane follows with:

"....great vibe in here right now. Like daddy just hit mommy at the dinner table. (in voice of mother) Just eat, mommy's ok. Daddy just got a little angry. Just eat!"

Anyways, I noticed above someone said that there is a good way to deal with hecklers and it brought this to mind.

I heard that some leaders of the black community are calling for a ban on the N-word (am i allowed to say nigger?).

This is a bad idea.

All this controversy about a single word is doing something that no one wants: it's making the word more powerful.

People who say that the word is so hateful and evil that it must never be said are engaging in a losing battle. You can't prevent people from saying a word. They can always use their lips to form the word, and it will be said. By getting enraged by its use, you're just handing a weapon on a silver platter to racists around the world who get their rocks off by pissing off black people.

If Richards' rant pisses you off: ignore him. Don't let him on your TV shows to apologize. Don't let it get you angry. Just.... ignore it. That's the only way this problem will go away.

I have this CD, and I agree, it is awesome.

Perhaps stand-up comics should only use a niggardly amount of racial slurs if at all.:)

Well, so in a country of free speech they want to "ban" a word?

And they will figure a way to make sure this word is banned, that no one in public will be able to say it. Then Kike, Mick, Dego, Spic, wetback, chink.... etc will all be banned..... then cunt and prick, bitch and bastard...... then they'll start in on other words and pretty soon names themselves will be wrong because from a name someone may make the wrong guess as to your heritage and offend you.... so then we'll just become numbers....

I believed we were a free country once..... damned if our own people decided to beg the government to take those freedoms away.

he aint no lenny bruce.

Good fucking point. :)