Richards Apologizes for Racial Slurs

I would hope drugs were involved.

Actual video of the event (AOL Video)

CNN Report (youtube)

I would also call this the 'nail in the coffin' for his career, if there was actually anything left already.

I watched the video, it was disturbing

a sour reminder when I watch Seinfeld from now on.

Seems kind of strange since he used to produce shows dealing with race relations and drug abuse while in the army..

How did you guys get the scoop on this? Michael Richards Molested as a Child, Checks into Rehab.

Thanks vas! I found the REASON he couldnt help himself in his drunken stupor!

Interesting angle! Of course the Media had been looking for dirt on Gibson, so this story probably won't get as much attention (although the footage seems to suggest this situation is more offensive).

the quality was so bad I think it was done with a camera phone. I don't know if it is illegal to videotape it - but it was probably against the clubs policy.

Ironic that you mention Kaufman. Whenever I think of him I think of the time he decided not to follow his lines and really disrupted a live TV show (I think Sat TV??) from the 80's. Richards a regular cast member, did not like it and they ended up fighting on live TV as he and no one else was in on Kaufman's joke. Kaufman's idea of humor was definitely original. It was kinda funny too.

You're really rad and obviously better than most. Unfortunately, most people do and say things they don't mean or accurately represent themselves when they abuse drugs and/or alcohol. I have no idea about Richards state of mind or who he is. He could be an ignorant ass and/or have been really loaded. I just wanted to let you know how cool you are. So thanks for that.

Look ThomasR, while I can appreciate your comment, the stupid shots you take at me are just that stupid. Have you ever been drunk? stoned/high? I notice you dont attest to having any first hand knowledge of either. As is always the case, you are entitled to your opinion as am I, just dont put sarcastic spin on how somone else saw the world when they were in an altered state of mind. Its thinking like that that allows someone like Foley to engage in the deplorable acts he did and then just say he has a drinking problem, its not an excuse!

Haha. I have the Tekken III announcer voice stuck in my head too deeply to remember the Street Fighter II announcer. But still, the point comes across.

He doesnt necessarily have to be racist. He was pissed off and bewildered and probably used the easiest method he could think of to strike back and these guys without any real thought. He called them a name. A name that is very well known to cause a negative reaction to these particular guys. No matter what ethnicity they were, he would have used the names or phrases that would have had a similar impact. Could be just as simple as that.

Of course, there are still ramifications to that...

That's what I was thinking too. I've heard decidedly non-racist white men use that word to describe someone they thought was a total a-hole, but just didn't feel the word "a-hole" was strong enough. I wouldn't do it myself, nor would I really condone it, but it doesn't necessarily make someone racist. In fact, I believe it was Chris Rock who first said, "There's black men, and then there's @!$%#s..."

But then again, the lynching comment has to be considered, too. =/

Sounds like he has an anger problem by the looks of that apology on Letterman.

That's not how I interpreted it. It sounds to me like he was just worried that people weren't taking his apology seriously, and questioned whether Letterman was really the best place to do it (considering people tune in/appear in the audience for that show expecting comedy, not grave sincerity).

The part I'm talking about specifically is where he blurts out 'I'm not a racist, that's what's insane about this, but it fires out of me...' I guess I took it to mean that he has a bit of a short fuse.

BTW here's the full video of the apology from last night, about 6 and a half minutes: http://www.ifilm.com/video/2798827?ns=1

We tend to think of words as specific constructs with specific meanings and uses, but they are the building blocks of speech acts and act in much more complicated ways. If you pay attention we almost never say quite what we mean. A silly little example might be at a train station, you might say to the clerk, "I'd like to go to Providence." Both of you will understand that as a request to buy a ticket from the clerk for the next train to Providence, but that's not literally what you said.

When African Americans use the word @!$%# we make the assumption they're using the same word as when racists use the word, but similar to the train example, there are some differences that don't come down to the strict definition of the word. Most significantly is context. When an African American uses the word, their ethnicity is itself part of the context, inseperable from the interpretation of the speech act. You have to pay attention to what is actually being communicated instead of focusing on what is specifically being said. I'm white, but while someone might disagree with my use of the word @!$%# above, noone is going to call me racist for it because the sentiment is not remotely racist. If I were saying something less clear, though, I would steer very much clear of using the word, knowing that my whiteness becomes part of my speech act.

Make sense? Or do you disagree?

Um, believe it or not, most of us don't start screaming the word "@!$%#" at someone when we get upset. =/