Kramer loses it

[the_jimmy_james]

Precisely... precisely!

Heckling is disrespectful to everybody involved. The performer is there giving their time and creativity. There are other audience members who are there to enjoy the show, and have given money to see it.

Having played music on stage and been heckled, well... I can also fully agree with Richards' anger. And well, as you say, HDS, they used ethnic slurs first, so all bets are off.

 

[Hungarian21]

Lol; I admit, hard not to laugh. 😉

 

[Number 8]

In other news, thousands of U.S. citizens are still being held against their will in Iraq.

Yes, but the news has to report on things people actually CARE about...unfortunately.

 

[Jamandi]

Regarding the double standard of racial slurs, the use of the word “Nigger” to me denotes a sub-human status because of it’s past usage. The use of the word “Cracker” to me is synonymous to saying “Stupid” or “Moron”. So in that regard, I don’t think there is a double standard because the words aren’t really parallel in meaning. I can’t think of a word that equals “Nigger”, i.e. below the status of the rest of the human race, which applies to someone who is Caucasian.

I’m not saying it’s ok for anyone to use either of those words with malicious intent, I just don’t see it as a double standard.

However what bothers me is the difference between these two statements:

1) He’s just some stupid white guy

2) He’s just some stupid black guy

The majority of people would find #2 much more offensive then #1. Picture an African-American speaker saying #1. Now picture a Caucasian speaker saying #2. There is a big difference in how that would be viewed and handled by the general public.

That’s an unfortunate double standard.

However, that may be neither here nor there.

For the record I'm Caucasian and I embrace the fact that I might be wrong 😉

 

[Celtic_Emperor]

Part of me does think that he could have had a little more self control than he did. Part of me thinks that, being a comedian, he should have been able to use that comedy to put the ruckus-makers down. The other, and somewhat larger, part of me agrees with Mr. James: if those hecklers couldn't take the heat, why'd they heckle? I recall hearing somewhere (Correct me if I'm wrong) that they threw cracker at him before or during his outburst. If true, that negates any outrage I have that Mr. Richards used the 'ol N-word. You want to hurl racial slurs? Expect them back. You feel like complaining? I could really care less. Doesn't matter who you are. Black, white, green, purple, show some respect. Yes, he lost it. But those fools in the crowd should have shown some control themselves and given the man, who was entertaining them, the respect any fellow human deserves. If they didn't enjoy the performance, well, they could have left quietly. That's what I'd do. By being a disruption, you not only disrespect the performer but you disrespect your fellow audience members who may well be enjoying the performance.

Thats really true, my Contradicto. And to clear it up for you, yes, he was called a cracker and other things.

Its like theres mentality that a performer has to take the crap that a heckler throws at them. If they're trying to work, and they don't feel like working you into the bit or working around you, as a heckler, thats their prerogative. Alternatively, it may be BECAUSE they go off on you and start biting back that they get good reviews, applause, or it becomes part of their routine.

And actually, thats what happened at first. He started biting back and it sounded like alot of the people there were cheering, laughing, and clapping. In fact, nobody started to get up and leave until the hecklers got involved personally and people were beginning to see that this wasn't going anywhere.

I agree that it is the hecklers, and NOT Richards who should have STFU. They're just as responsible as he is, perhaps more so in that nobody asks hecklers to do what they do. They're jerks who like to ruin the moment and embarass people. If they didn't like it, they could have uped and left, but they stayed around to argue with him. If they had left, perhaps he could have salvaged the situation, composed himself, and apologized for the words and the disturbance to the rest of the audiance..and, just as importantly, get on with the show.

Afterall, he's there to entertain them, not the hecklers. Hecklers are like internet trolls- they're there to cause a nuisance.

I don't like this sort of sentiment in the air that comedians have to be passive-agressive or they're failures who cannot take criticism. Take comedians like George Carlin. That guy doesn't apologize for anything, and he is beloved by many.

 

[Umojar]

Precisely... precisely!

Heckling is disrespectful to everybody involved. The performer is there giving their time and creativity. There are other audience members who are there to enjoy the show, and have given money to see it.

Having played music on stage and been heckled, well... I can also fully agree with Richards' anger. And well, as you say, HDS, they used ethnic slurs first, so all bets are off.

First off, they didn't use ethnic slurs first. It was long after he used the n word 7 times and talked about them hanging from trees that they said "cracker-ass mother fucker" or something like that. They said it as they were leaving. Not that it should justify your eye-for-an-eye theory. As an adult you should know the limits of free speech.

I've seen his standup before. He isn't very funny. Hecklers aren't the best thing, but it's part of going on stage. He acted out of frustration. Rtl articulated it better than I can, but honestly, if it was just him saying the N word, it wouldn't have been all over the news. He just kept going on and on, thinking he could minimalize it somehow, similar to what Vlad said. I think they made too big of a deal and shouldn't have been something that was covered all day, but the fact that some people here are trying to defend what he said is ridiculous. It wasn't funny, he isn't funny. Like the guy said, Seinfeld was the only thing he really had. I don't think he's a racist, but it isn't something you can just tell. If it wasn't televised, would he still be apologizing? Probably not. Is he really sorry? Maybe that it caused such a reaction, but I doubt he really takes it back. I'm speculating there though. I think the best statement made here, is that he rated himself with that. If you have to go there to be funny, it shows you're not that great a comic in the first place.

 

[morgandee]

nintendo ?!?!

 

[Celtic_Emperor]

Aside from repeatedly saying nigger, I felt everything he said was funny. It was basically the outrageousness of the situation that people were laughing at and the tone of voice in which he was saying all these things. It was funny because it was an unexpected outburst.

If you listen closely, theres this one dude whose laughing throughout the entire thing, and I was like this guy. I didn't agree with what was going on, but I couldn't help but just laugh at the stupidity of the situation that both Richards and the hecklers put themselves in.

 

[Umojar]

I saw it, and I did hear that people were laughing. I was offended by it, which I'm sure you can understand to some extent. It was mainly the tone that did it for me. It started sounding like it wasn't a joke anymore.

 

[Celtic_Emperor]

They were clapping and cheering too, which probably sent him mixed feelings of whether what he was doing was right or wrong based on the audiance reaction (and they were mixed ethnically, so it wasn't like this was at the Apollo or something). When he told the hecklers off people were applauding him. Afterall, hecklers can ruin something for everyone. I cannot place the blame entirely on him. Its a little bit of everyone's fault. Some more than others. Him being the most obvious example of "more".

The hecklers shouldn't have provoked him. Nobody asks for a person to become a heckler. Like I said earlier, hecklers are like internet trolls- they're their to be a nuisance. How he wants to deal with them is up to him. There is not some universal, unspoken and unwritten rule that says you have to ignore hecklers or deal with them in a passive-agressive way. Many comedians work them into their routine, or just flat out accost them back, like he did. It just so happened it was racial, and it just so happened that there was an audiance. If he had said this on the street to someone it wouldn't be in the news, likely. Its only in the papers, in the news, on the radio, and on YouTube because it was a public spectacle at an actual establishment.

In and of itself, this situation didn't deserve the attention that it recieved.

Maybe I'm just jaded, but I'd actually pay to see an outburst like that again, on stage, if I was there to see him in person. If he could work it into his act somehow that would be funny, though would likely get boring and old quickly. Which is fine by me. I'd only ever want to see it once or twice anyway.

He said racial things. Its not so much a crime as it is uncooth.

 

[ILove2Tickle1]

nintendo ?!?!

:: beats oriyaborealis about the head and shoulders with a nerf bat :: Everybody keeps saying "n-word" and your guess.... I choked on a french fry when I read that. XD

 

[Umojar]

I agree with you that they shouldn't have heckled him, but there's no reason to go racial. When he said the racial remarks, it stopped being just about him and the heckler. That's the problem I have with it. He wasn't just attacking the heckler anymore.

 

[Celtic_Emperor]

He wasn't just attacking the heckler anymore.

Ah, but the problem is he didn't feel that way and neither did the hecklers. It was an interpersonal rant between two people that just so happened to include an audiance. If by "anymore" you mean simply using the word nigger is a bersmerchment of black people everywhere, I have to disagree with that, especially as I am trying to see this from his point of view. Its reasonable to believe that he has no problems with black people, and wouldn't call the good black folk niggers, but he's calling THIS ONE a nigger, and is making a contrast between the two. In other words, the word takes on a new meaning other than the slavery and this and that.

Perhaps to him, a nigger is a crude, stupid black person, and that it takes negative qualities to be a nigger, and that not all black people are niggers, in the same way that not all white people are trailer park trash.

One could argue quite reasonably that the meaning of the word has changed for so many people, even as it has for blacks using the word amongst themselves.

The word itself is not racist, its whats implied through it that may or may not be. I do not feel that this display was thorough and clear enough to say what was, other than it being ridiculous and unnecessary. It being racist is actually questionable depending on who you talk to. Its not instantly some universal truth just because the word was spoken.

If a black can laugh at it, then maybe it shows the definition has changed and that any particular black person is not offended by it.

Honestly, I feel people need to begin desensitizing themselves to the stigma and impact of the word. Not by using it repeatedly or recklessly, but by refusing to uphold the negative evils behind the HISTORY of the word. Let a NEW HISTORY overtake the word, and let it be lighthearted and jovial. Anyone who refuses to do this is a part of the problem and not the solution. Why uphold the centuries of hate through the word. Thats whats also ridiculous. Either the word should take a better meaning, or people should stop using it completely. Since the latter is not likely to happen, then the word needs to change.

To have to be so PC that we call it "the n-word" is crazy. To have to make an abriviation for a racial slur is stupid.

People cannot heal themselves if they don't let it happen.

 

[TheChameleon]

My personal belief is that him using the N-Word on that guy was like me calling somebody something offensive to them.

(Not that I would, but...) If I called this woman a bitch because she was yelling at me and causing a ruckus, would EVERY women in the room have the right to be offended?

Well, possibly, because I'm swearing in front of women, but, your at a comedy club, and lets be honest, swear words are funny.

But, take my example there, and realize what i'm saying. He was calling THAT guy a nigger, not the entire black race niggers.

That being said, I still wouldn't call anyone a nigger, nigga, or nigg, or any other variation of said word.

As such, I was called a nigger by a black person before, and... well, needless to say, that ended in an altercation where I ended up calling him every offensive word I could think of for a white man, my favorite of which was calling him "Saltine" (A popular brand of cracker)

As such, I reversed the roles that Kramer did, which, personally, I think would have been funny if he did.

Kramer: "hey, check this out, i'm Chris Rock... Hey, Shut up Cracker! Get the f-ck out my club!"

But, either way, I won't hold it against him, I don't let people's outbursts tell me what I believe or what I don't believe.

Especially on a first outburst. If someone has repeated outbursts in public and they're famous, well, thats they're bad. But one? Whats wrong with one outburst?

By the way, i'm a lizard of all colors 😀

 

[Umojar]

It doesn't matter what he felt he was doing. He didn't know what the fuck he was doing at the time. The word itself IS racist, I don't know what you're talking about. No one uses nigger without it involving black people. Please tell me when it doesn't. You're forgetting he didn't just say nigger either. He said other things around it that made it perfectly clear what he meant when he said it. He wasn't worried about what it meant. That's why it was an OUTBURST. He was trying to hurt him, so he said something that would be offensive as possible and it was a cheap shot. I never thought I'd have to debate why using blatantly racist remarks is wrong.

As for Chameleon, no, when you use the word nigger in the context he used, COMBINED with all the other stuff it's clear it was just an attack on him because he was black, not because of him being rude. Tell me this... what the hell could he have possibly meant by "50 years ago you'd be hanging from a tree?" Is that still only talking to the heckler? NOOOOOOOOOO. That has nothing to do with what the guy said to him anymore. That should be offensive to EVERYONE, not just black people. The fact you guys actually find that funny is a little disturbing honestly. If the guy was really a "nigger", he and his friends would've rushed the stage and knocked him out. He took the high road and left. Saying someone isn't funny(which is all he said) isn't a reason to be called all this shit. That's why he realized he needed to apologize.

 

[Celtic_Emperor]

Again, you can even delve deeper into the meaning behind the "50 years ago" comment. You can, even with that comment direct it at a single person and have it apply only to them.

The way I took it, it meant that if THIS black guy would have said it 50 years ago, he would have had a fork up his ass. Meaning that, if Richards had any say in it, he would have done THAT to THIS guy for HECKLING him, not because the guy is black. He's not necessarily bringing up the segregation of blacks with that in mind. Depending on how you look at it, it takes on a different meaning and interpretation. Even "a fork up your ass" can mean anything, and we're not in Richard's head.

Theres no way to be sure he's tied all the remarks to everyone and not just this individual. He also pointed and said "HE'S a nigger" while there were other blacks in the room that he could have pointed at and called them the same in his rage. He could have pointed to all of them and said "you're all niggers" or something. He didn't, and he singled this person out. Again, we have no way of knowing whether he was saying that thinking all black people are, or just this one guy. For us to assume it to be the way we assume it (lower lifeform, slave, etc) is wrong, especially if we do it because its the most common assumption, and because a white man said it. Thats a bias in and of itself. To Richards, in that moment, a nigger may have simply been a heckler. We just don't know. Its hard to analyze someone when they're enraged. You don't know how they mean what they're saying, but you're certainly free to interprete it as you wish, which is what everyone has done.

Because of that, it explains why there are many that are upset and people that got laughs out of it.

 

[cloud91]

I have seen people say nasty things when they were in nasty moods, including myself.
It doesnt make them racist, I think everybody is making a big hype over nothin, shows the power of YouTube

 

[Celtic_Emperor]

We don't even know if he was refering to his race. We just assume he was because the word is race-bound and specific to black people. Just because someone uses it doesn't mean they're using it that way. We're limiting what it could possibly mean to one single thing in one single way, OUR way, the TRADITIONAL way, the HISTORICAL way. We just go with what its meant UP TILL NOW, which is why I said we need to learn to desensitize the word from it's social and historical stigmas, that way problems like this don't happen and people aren't screwed or sued because they used a word like that.

I do agree with Estrada when he said something to the effect of "if you use the n-word and you're not black, you've got some explaining to do".

That Richards just stormed off and did not explain, apologize or do anything at that point is whats wrong.

As if subtly defending him? Do you feel I'm being subtle? I don't have anything against the man for saying this. Why should I? Tell me. Honestly. Should my feelings be so fickle or my like or dislike for a person be determined by a single occurance?

Nobody here has defended what he did, anyway. Explaining it for the sake of conversation is something else, though. Its why this is a topic and a thread. If this was just supposed to be a "do you think this was right or wrong thread", that would be pointless.

 

[Celtic_Emperor]

I have seen people say nasty things when they were in nasty moods, including myself.
It doesnt make them racist, I think everybody is making a big hype over nothin, shows the power of YouTube

Yeah. For example, some people might call someone a beaner and not be talking about hispanics at all, but rather, refering to someone who eats alot of beans or includes them in their diet on a regular basis. While it could also be directed at a person who happens to be hispanic or mexican, it could also be a way of refering to someone who passes gas alot who just so happens to be mexican. "Geez, what are you, a beaner?!" To say that, for example, even to a hispanic, doesn't necessarily make it racist as it may be a comment about the food and not the person. The racist aspect of the comment is more about the person, and how they may be so poor thats all they eat, etc.

The fact that a better word could have been chosen is not the point. Part of the crudeness of saying it this way is what would make it funny if done right and clearly.

Richards was not clear, which is why people argue over it.

 

[SYELLA]

Again, you can even delve deeper into the meaning behind the "50 years ago" comment. You can, even with that comment direct it at a single person and have it apply only to them.

The way I took it, it meant that if THIS black guy would have said it 50 years ago, he would have had a fork up his ass. Meaning that, if Richards had any say in it, he would have done THAT to THIS guy for HECKLING him, not because the guy is black. He's not necessarily bringing up the segregation of blacks with that in mind. Depending on how you look at it, it takes on a different meaning and interpretation. Even "a fork up your ass" can mean anything, and we're not in Richard's head.

Theres no way to be sure he's tied all the remarks to everyone and not just this individual. He also pointed and said "HE'S a nigger" while there were other blacks in the room that he could have pointed at and called them the same in his rage. He could have pointed to all of them and said "you're all niggers" or something. He didn't, and he singled this person out. Again, we have no way of knowing whether he was saying that thinking all black people are, or just this one guy. For us to assume it to be the way we assume it (lower lifeform, slave, etc) is wrong, especially if we do it because its the most common assumption, and because a white man said it. Thats a bias in and of itself. To Richards, in that moment, a nigger may have simply been a heckler. We just don't know. Its hard to analyze someone when they're enraged. You don't know how they mean what they're saying, but you're certainly free to interprete it as you wish, which is what everyone has done.

Because of that, it explains why there are many that are upset and people that got laughs out of it.

No. Richards meant exactly what he said. I assure you 50 or more years ago a black man would have a fork, stick, knife anything available up the ass, including testicles stuffed up the mouth during the lynching. Also , just saying the word nigger instead of niggers in my opinion gets no pass from me. He could have just plain told this heckler to shut the fuck up, called him a moron, made fun about how he looked or dressed. But he didn't. The anger and rage he spewed out came from deep within his soul. I wont give him a benifit of a doubt. Or anyone, black or white, stupid enough to use any ethnic slur to embarrass or humiliate . That's what the fool did.

 

[Celtic_Emperor]

He could have just plain told this heckler to shut the fuck up, called him a moron...But he didn't

Actually, he did. But your point is well taken.

The anger and rage he spewed out came from deep within his soul.

I don't mean to be argumentive, but theres no way you could possibly know that just because he was ranting. In fact, its because he was ranting that makes everything curious and suspect about it.

I guess what I'm saying is that I wont give him a benifit of a doubt.

That is definitely your right, and I respect it.

Or anyone, black or white, stupid enough to use any ethnic slur to embarrass or humiliate . That's what the fool did.

Yes, that is what he did. I'm not disagreeing with you.

I think he's intitled to one free screw-up and I'm going to give it to him.

 

[Beaunanza]

There WAS a 6 minute interview Richards did on Letterman in which he "explained" himself and appologized. I watched the interview on YouTube yesterday, but today it shows that it has been removed because of copyright infringment via CBS. Anyway, did anyone see that? And if this has already been brought up, I'm sorry.

 

[Beaunanza]

Okay, I found another version of the whole interview. Watch it before it gets deleted.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o5eZqtb1hZw

 

[Umojar]

I think he's intitled to one free screw-up and I'm going to give it to him.

Understandable, but trying to reinterpret what he said to try and say it wasn't about race is just denying the obvious. He wouldn't have felt the need to apologize if it was really that unclear. You're making all these situations that could've come about that either just plain don't make sense or aren't likely at all in some attempt to justify it. Yeah, he does deserve another chance, but there's no need to try to make light of what he did to try to prove that.

 

[Celtic_Emperor]

Understandable, but trying to reinterpret what he said to try and say it wasn't about race is just denying the obvious. He wouldn't have felt the need to apologize if it was really that unclear. You're making all these situations that could've come about that either just plain don't make sense or aren't likely at all in some attempt to justify it. Yeah, he does deserve another chance, but there's no need to try to make light of what he did to try to prove that.

I'm not trying to reinterpret anything. I know he was wrong. If you were paying attention to the way I was addressing this issue, you will have seen that I was trying to afford him any possible explaination (whether its actually that way or not), for the sake of conversation here and many of the points I made are valid and would be possibilities, even though they're most likely not.

I did what a lawyer would do, for the sake of giving my client a reasonable chance to be heard, even though even I know he's guilty.

Make no mistake, I know he was wrong and what he did was inexcusable, but, if I had not did what I did, this would be an open and shut thread that would have been done quickly. For the purposes of getting some debate out of it, it needed to be addressed this way from me as there needed to be someone on the opposite side of the board for the sake of said conversation. Otherwise everyone is just saying the same thing, which isn't really interesting. To simply say "maybe he meant something else", wouldn't have been enough on my part, no would only asking whether people thought it was right or wrong.

Finally, notice that I put the thumbs down icon in the thread title. I was against what he did from the beginning, but deliberated for the sake of conversation. What COULD have been possible, but most likely wasn't.

Does that make sense to you?

(Oh, and I still think the whole episode was funny. That part is true. He made an ass of himself on stage, and I got a good lol out of that one)