Yooooo, Definitely need to clarify this. THIS IS NOT WHAT I MEANT TO SAY. Was trying to say “those Bug-A-Boos” in reference to haters and doubters. Regardless of my intention, I understand the historical context of the term that came out of my mouth and I apologize. https://t.co/Dy4vVuigin pic.twitter.com/DL0lqcz0jK

— Robert Griffin III (@RGIII) December 13, 2022

A few weeks ago I heard RG3 say the F word on live TV in a football game with Baylor and everybody around me heard it too I couldn't believe it I thought they had a 3 second delay to blip that stuff out?

Bug a boos makes about as much sense as what actually came out of his mouth. He couldn't just say naysayers?
If a white analyst would have made the same mistake it would be the lead story on CNN and been summarily dismissed from the job.

Jigga What?

Alf said:

---

Bug a boos makes about as much sense as what actually came out of his mouth. He couldn't just say naysayers?
If a white analyst would have made the same mistake it would be the lead story on CNN and been summarily dismissed from the job.

---

And had that been the case, no number of apologies and pleas for forgiveness would ever be enough - the person would automatically be toast.

Last year when he did our game against Ok St, there was a fan on screen with pizza box on his/her head. The fan was . . . brown and RG III's comment was something like - "I think they've been to Mexico Joes"

I thought for sure it would be his last broadcast, but nothing happened and no one has ever mentioned it.

I've heard him say bugaboos on air before. He likes to use goofy words. I have friends who can't stand him during games, yet he's building a loyal following who enjoy the wacky colloquialisms. The response probably would be a little different had Pollack or Palmer dropped this but they didn't.

If he keeps using poor word choices or tweeting out holocaust denial videos then there's cause for concern. I like to trust people's word until they break that trust.

wongobear said:

---

Last year when he did our game against Ok St, there was a fan on screen with pizza box on his/her head. The fan was . . . brown and RG III's comment was something like - "I think they've been to Mexico Joes"

I thought for sure it would be his last broadcast, but nothing happened and no one has ever mentioned it.

---

Are you sure he didnt say Eskimo Joe's? That is probably what he meant anyhow.

What is the "historical context" of bug-a-boos? I've just always understood it to mean a mistake. God, I am so NOT woke! Please forgive me!

You mean what's the historical context of 'jig a boos'..that's what he actually said...it's a racially demeaning word to refer to blacks..

Maybe he meant to refer to the Bugaloos.

He's clearly racist.

RGIII tomorrow at ESPN HR https://t.co/fYJOmJZc1b pic.twitter.com/ecNSXbndKV

— Back Up Dancer for the Trap Nasties (@BrianWilliams80) December 13, 2022

whitetrash said:

---

Maybe he meant to refer to the Bugaloos.

---

70s kids' TV was so damn trippy.

https://www.bugaboo.com/us-en

boykin_spaniel said:

---

I've heard him say bugaboos on air before. He likes to use goofy words. I have friends who can't stand him during games, yet he's building a loyal following who enjoy the wacky colloquialisms. The response probably would be a little different had Pollack or Palmer dropped this but they didn't.

If he keeps using poor word choices or tweeting out holocaust denial videos then there's cause for concern. I like to trust people's word until they break that trust.

---

I will always be grateful to RGIII for what he did for BU on the field and the positive long term impact that we're still enjoying the benefits of today, but thus far I'm not a fan of him as an analyst. IMO he tries too hard to sound clever and cute and when he's been involved in one of our games he's sounded like he's actively rooting against us - I'm sure in an attempt to show he's "unbiased". Initially, I was pretty pumped when he got the job with ESPN but to me since then he's been a disappointment in the role.

PartyBear said:

---

wongobear said:

---

Last year when he did our game against Ok St, there was a fan on screen with pizza box on his/her head. The fan was . . . brown and RG III's comment was something like - "I think they've been to Mexico Joes"

I thought for sure it would be his last broadcast, but nothing happened and no one has ever mentioned it.

---

Are you sure he didnt say Eskimo Joe's? That is probably what he meant anyhow.

---

I am sure, he was making a direct reference to Eskimo Joes after talking about how he had visited there. He enunciated and made the play on words specifically so that we'd understand the difference.

Edit - I couln't find the comment, but the game is here: 2021 NCAA Football Baylor at Oklahoma State - YouTube. It could have been edited as part of the back and forth to the booth after breaks.

Side note - if you need a refresher of Bohannan when he wasn't at his best then watch that game. Cold splash in the face.

Johnny Bear said:

---

Alf said:

---

Bug a boos makes about as much sense as what actually came out of his mouth. He couldn't just say naysayers?
If a white analyst would have made the same mistake it would be the lead story on CNN and been summarily dismissed from the job.

---

And had that been the case, no number of apologies and pleas for forgiveness would ever be enough - the person would automatically be toast.

---

I've never understood the frustration some white boomers experience at the hypothetical prospect of being restricted from saying racially insensitive or demeaning things.

If a white person had said this on air or in public, it would say something completely different about their inner feelings and character. This was a really poor word choice by Robert, obviously, but no one really believes he looks down on Black people. Unless it's truly a tongue-tie situation, racial slurs don't slip out of the mouths of non-racist white people. That some of you struggle with this concept is truly baffling to me.

I find that casual fans who aren't deep into the X's and O's tend to like his silly word play and somewhat goofy demeanor in the booth. Also maybe younger fans, like GenZ. Granted my assumption is from asking like 3 people on the subject.

If he reeled it back 50% I think he would be a pretty solid young broadcaster. He'll hit a great line but then deliver a cringy trying to hard line that negates his nice line.

He's better than Gary Danielson.

Stefano DiMera said:

---

You mean what's the historical context of 'jig a boos'..that's what he actually said...it's a racially demeaning word to refer to blacks..

---

Oh ok. I didn't listen to the clip. Now I get it…thanks.

He gets wide latitude from me for his "Tyrone Biggums" reference during the BYU game.

bear2be2 said:

---

Johnny Bear said:

---

Alf said:

---

Bug a boos makes about as much sense as what actually came out of his mouth. He couldn't just say naysayers?
If a white analyst would have made the same mistake it would be the lead story on CNN and been summarily dismissed from the job.

---

And had that been the case, no number of apologies and pleas for forgiveness would ever be enough - the person would automatically be toast.

---

I've never understood the frustration some white boomers experience at the hypothetical prospect of being restricted from saying racially insensitive or demeaning things.

If a white person had said this on air or in public, it would say something completely different about their inner feelings and character. This was a really poor weird choice by Robert, obviously, but no one really believes he looks down on Black people. Unless it's truly a tongue-tie situation, racial slurs don't slip out of the mouths of non-racist white people. That some of you struggle with this concept is truly baffling to me.

---

I think it's about forgiveness. A HS teenager was uninvited from attending UTennessee because she said the n-word in a snapshot 3 years before.

If we are on a zero tolerance policy, it should be implemented fairly.

Unfortunately we all know the "zero tolerance policy" is mostly a one way street that White people are expected to walk.

But I believe in giving everyone of every single race some grace & tolerance. Unless something is said with a obvious intention to be mean/hateful then it should NOT be a big deal.

RGIII obviously did not mean to be offensive or mean to Black people.

And as a guy raised my whole life in East Texas I have never even heard of that term as a slur...so it seem pretty obscure to me.

Had I been watching that show live I would not have thought anything of the term except it must be some slang for internet haters.

bear2be2 said:

---

Johnny Bear said:

---

Alf said:

---

Bug a boos makes about as much sense as what actually came out of his mouth. He couldn't just say naysayers?
If a white analyst would have made the same mistake it would be the lead story on CNN and been summarily dismissed from the job.

---

And had that been the case, no number of apologies and pleas for forgiveness would ever be enough - the person would automatically be toast.

---

I've never understood the frustration some white boomers experience at the hypothetical prospect of being restricted from saying racially insensitive or demeaning things.

If a white person had said this on air or in public, it would say something completely different about their inner feelings and character. This was a really poor weird choice by Robert, obviously, but no one really believes he looks down on Black people. Unless it's truly a tongue-tie situation, racial slurs don't slip out of the mouths of non-racist white people. That some of you struggle with this concept is truly baffling to me.

---

What's truly baffling to me is how badly someone like you can miss the point entirely.

It's exactly 0% about frustration over being "restricted from saying racially insensitive things". I am offended by racially insensitive things being said by anybody (regardless of their race) directed at another race (regardless of which race the insensitive comment is being directed at). The point is about the societal double standard that treats white offenders differently from black ones. In RGIII's case I'm sure this was a true slip of the tongue which he subsequently clarified. He will be forgiven - as he should be - and likely nothing more will happen - as it also should be. The point is RGIII should be treated the same way if he was a white guy that had a slip of the tongue, but most people with at least half of a brain know that wouldn't be the case. And that's the point - the double standard.

Jack Bauer said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Johnny Bear said:

---

Alf said:

---

Bug a boos makes about as much sense as what actually came out of his mouth. He couldn't just say naysayers?
If a white analyst would have made the same mistake it would be the lead story on CNN and been summarily dismissed from the job.

---

And had that been the case, no number of apologies and pleas for forgiveness would ever be enough - the person would automatically be toast.

---

I've never understood the frustration some white boomers experience at the hypothetical prospect of being restricted from saying racially insensitive or demeaning things.

If a white person had said this on air or in public, it would say something completely different about their inner feelings and character. This was a really poor weird choice by Robert, obviously, but no one really believes he looks down on Black people. Unless it's truly a tongue-tie situation, racial slurs don't slip out of the mouths of non-racist white people. That some of you struggle with this concept is truly baffling to me.

---

I think it's about forgiveness. A HS teenager was uninvited from attending UTennessee because she said the n-word in a snapshot 3 years before.

If we are on a zero tolerance policy, it should be implemented fairly.

---

Forgiveness doesn't require that we grant people who have shown themselves to be racist/hateful special privileges. And admittance to a university -- like employment and patronage of a private business -- is a privilege, not a right.

I'm all for personal growth and forgiveness, but I don't have any problem with holding people accountable for the things they say and do. And again a white person using racial slurs for other races isn't the same thing as someone of the same race doing it. The psychology and motive is completely different.

Anyone who could be caught using racial slurs is racist. And they need to reckon with that. If you're not racist, those words aren't an active part of your vocabulary.

Johnny Bear said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Johnny Bear said:

---

Alf said:

---

Bug a boos makes about as much sense as what actually came out of his mouth. He couldn't just say naysayers?
If a white analyst would have made the same mistake it would be the lead story on CNN and been summarily dismissed from the job.

---

And had that been the case, no number of apologies and pleas for forgiveness would ever be enough - the person would automatically be toast.

---

I've never understood the frustration some white boomers experience at the hypothetical prospect of being restricted from saying racially insensitive or demeaning things.

If a white person had said this on air or in public, it would say something completely different about their inner feelings and character. This was a really poor weird choice by Robert, obviously, but no one really believes he looks down on Black people. Unless it's truly a tongue-tie situation, racial slurs don't slip out of the mouths of non-racist white people. That some of you struggle with this concept is truly baffling to me.

---

What's truly baffling to me is how badly someone like you can miss the point entirely.

It's exactly 0% about frustration over being "restricted from saying racially insensitive things". I am offended by racially insensitive things being said by anybody (regardless of their race) directed at another race (regardless of which race the insensitive comment is being directed at). The point is about the societal double standard that treats white offenders differently from black ones. In RGIII's case I'm sure this was a true slip of the tongue which he subsequently clarified. He will be forgiven - as he should be - and likely nothing more will happen - as it also should be. The point is RGIII should be treated the same way if he was a white guy that had a slip of the tongue, but most people with at least half of a brain know that wouldn't be the case. And that's the point - the double standard.

---

It's not a double standard because it's not the same offense. And anyone who doesn't understand this is either daft or being intellectually dishonest.

This isn't a difficult concept. You can -- and likely do -- say things about your family and friends you would never let others say. That's because when you say it, it's understood and acknowledged that it's coming from a place of love.

It's not possible for a white person to use a racial slur in a respectful or reverential way. If you're using it in any context, you're in the wrong because people from those communities have made it clear there's no good context for a white person to use them.

A decent person accepts that and moves on without any need to use our defend the use of a word that wasn't in their vocabulary to begin with.

Johnny Bear said:

---

boykin_spaniel said:

---

I've heard him say bugaboos on air before. He likes to use goofy words. I have friends who can't stand him during games, yet he's building a loyal following who enjoy the wacky colloquialisms. The response probably would be a little different had Pollack or Palmer dropped this but they didn't.

If he keeps using poor word choices or tweeting out holocaust denial videos then there's cause for concern. I like to trust people's word until they break that trust.

---

I will always be grateful to RGIII for what he did for BU on the field and the positive long term impact that we're still enjoying the benefits of today, but thus far I'm not a fan of him as an analyst. IMO he tries too hard to sound clever and cute and when he's been involved in one of our games he's sounded like he's actively rooting against us - I'm sure in an attempt to show he's "unbiased". Initially, I was pretty pumped when he got the job with ESPN but to me since then he's been a disappointment in the role.

---

I agree

bear2be2 said:

---

Johnny Bear said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Johnny Bear said:

---

Alf said:

---

Bug a boos makes about as much sense as what actually came out of his mouth. He couldn't just say naysayers?
If a white analyst would have made the same mistake it would be the lead story on CNN and been summarily dismissed from the job.

---

And had that been the case, no number of apologies and pleas for forgiveness would ever be enough - the person would automatically be toast.

---

I've never understood the frustration some white boomers experience at the hypothetical prospect of being restricted from saying racially insensitive or demeaning things.

If a white person had said this on air or in public, it would say something completely different about their inner feelings and character. This was a really poor weird choice by Robert, obviously, but no one really believes he looks down on Black people. Unless it's truly a tongue-tie situation, racial slurs don't slip out of the mouths of non-racist white people. That some of you struggle with this concept is truly baffling to me.

---

What's truly baffling to me is how badly someone like you can miss the point entirely.

It's exactly 0% about frustration over being "restricted from saying racially insensitive things". I am offended by racially insensitive things being said by anybody (regardless of their race) directed at another race (regardless of which race the insensitive comment is being directed at). The point is about the societal double standard that treats white offenders differently from black ones. In RGIII's case I'm sure this was a true slip of the tongue which he subsequently clarified. He will be forgiven - as he should be - and likely nothing more will happen - as it also should be. The point is RGIII should be treated the same way if he was a white guy that had a slip of the tongue, but most people with at least half of a brain know that wouldn't be the case. And that's the point - the double standard.

---

It's not a double standard because it's not the same offense. And anyone who doesn't understand this is either daft or being intellectually dishonest.

This isn't a difficult concept. You can -- and likely do -- say things about your family and friends you would never let others say. That's because when you say it, it's understood and acknowledged that it's coming from a place of love.

It's not possible for a white person to use a racial slur in a respectful or reverential way. If you're using it in any context, you're in the wrong because people from those communities have made it clear there's no good context for a white person to use them.

A decent person accepts that and moves on without any need to use our defend the use of a word that wasn't in their vocabulary to begin with.

---

Dude - we're talking about things that are unintended misspeaks and slips of the tongue - and the double standard that nonetheless still exists that you are being intellectually dishonest about if you maintain it doesn't. People sometimes just truly make mistakes and the consequences should be equal for all.

Anyway, done with the back and forth as I can't understand it for you.

bear2be2 said:

---

Johnny Bear said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Johnny Bear said:

---

Alf said:

---

Bug a boos makes about as much sense as what actually came out of his mouth. He couldn't just say naysayers?
If a white analyst would have made the same mistake it would be the lead story on CNN and been summarily dismissed from the job.

---

And had that been the case, no number of apologies and pleas for forgiveness would ever be enough - the person would automatically be toast.

---

I've never understood the frustration some white boomers experience at the hypothetical prospect of being restricted from saying racially insensitive or demeaning things.

If a white person had said this on air or in public, it would say something completely different about their inner feelings and character. This was a really poor weird choice by Robert, obviously, but no one really believes he looks down on Black people. Unless it's truly a tongue-tie situation, racial slurs don't slip out of the mouths of non-racist white people. That some of you struggle with this concept is truly baffling to me.

---

What's truly baffling to me is how badly someone like you can miss the point entirely.

It's exactly 0% about frustration over being "restricted from saying racially insensitive things". I am offended by racially insensitive things being said by anybody (regardless of their race) directed at another race (regardless of which race the insensitive comment is being directed at). The point is about the societal double standard that treats white offenders differently from black ones. In RGIII's case I'm sure this was a true slip of the tongue which he subsequently clarified. He will be forgiven - as he should be - and likely nothing more will happen - as it also should be. The point is RGIII should be treated the same way if he was a white guy that had a slip of the tongue, but most people with at least half of a brain know that wouldn't be the case. And that's the point - the double standard.

---

It's not a double standard because it's not the same offense. And anyone who doesn't understand this is either daft or being intellectually dishonest.

This isn't a difficult concept. You can -- and likely do -- say things about your family and friends you would never let others say. That's because when you say it, it's understood and acknowledged that it's coming from a place of love.

It's not possible for a white person to use a racial slur in a respectful or reverential way. If you're using it in any context, you're in the wrong because people from those communities have made it clear there's no good context for a white person to use them.

A decent person accepts that and moves on without any need to use our defend the use of a word that wasn't in their vocabulary to begin with.

---

You really need to be strapped to gurney and forced to watch a 72 hour marathon of alternating episodes of: (a) All in the Family; (b) The Jeffersons; and (c) Sanford and Son.

bear2be2 said:

---

Johnny Bear said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Johnny Bear said:

---

Alf said:

---

Bug a boos makes about as much sense as what actually came out of his mouth. He couldn't just say naysayers?
If a white analyst would have made the same mistake it would be the lead story on CNN and been summarily dismissed from the job.

---

And had that been the case, no number of apologies and pleas for forgiveness would ever be enough - the person would automatically be toast.

---

I've never understood the frustration some white boomers experience at the hypothetical prospect of being restricted from saying racially insensitive or demeaning things.

If a white person had said this on air or in public, it would say something completely different about their inner feelings and character. This was a really poor weird choice by Robert, obviously, but no one really believes he looks down on Black people. Unless it's truly a tongue-tie situation, racial slurs don't slip out of the mouths of non-racist white people. That some of you struggle with this concept is truly baffling to me.

---

What's truly baffling to me is how badly someone like you can miss the point entirely.

It's exactly 0% about frustration over being "restricted from saying racially insensitive things". I am offended by racially insensitive things being said by anybody (regardless of their race) directed at another race (regardless of which race the insensitive comment is being directed at). The point is about the societal double standard that treats white offenders differently from black ones. In RGIII's case I'm sure this was a true slip of the tongue which he subsequently clarified. He will be forgiven - as he should be - and likely nothing more will happen - as it also should be. The point is RGIII should be treated the same way if he was a white guy that had a slip of the tongue, but most people with at least half of a brain know that wouldn't be the case. And that's the point - the double standard.

---

It's not a double standard because it's not the same offense. And anyone who doesn't understand this is either daft or being intellectually dishonest.

This isn't a difficult concept. You can -- and likely do -- say things about your family and friends you would never let others say. That's because when you say it, it's understood and acknowledged that it's coming from a place of love.

It's not possible for a white person to use a racial slur in a respectful or reverential way. If you're using it in any context, you're in the wrong because people from those communities have made it clear there's no good context for a white person to use them.

A decent person accepts that and moves on without any need to use our defend the use of a word that wasn't in their vocabulary to begin with.

---

Kyler Murray was caught tweeting homophobic slurs when he was 15. I guess we should strip him of his Heisman and kick him out of the NFL if you feel everyone needs to be accountable.

Jack Bauer said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Johnny Bear said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Johnny Bear said:

---

Alf said:

---

Bug a boos makes about as much sense as what actually came out of his mouth. He couldn't just say naysayers?
If a white analyst would have made the same mistake it would be the lead story on CNN and been summarily dismissed from the job.

---

And had that been the case, no number of apologies and pleas for forgiveness would ever be enough - the person would automatically be toast.

---

I've never understood the frustration some white boomers experience at the hypothetical prospect of being restricted from saying racially insensitive or demeaning things.

If a white person had said this on air or in public, it would say something completely different about their inner feelings and character. This was a really poor weird choice by Robert, obviously, but no one really believes he looks down on Black people. Unless it's truly a tongue-tie situation, racial slurs don't slip out of the mouths of non-racist white people. That some of you struggle with this concept is truly baffling to me.

---

What's truly baffling to me is how badly someone like you can miss the point entirely.

It's exactly 0% about frustration over being "restricted from saying racially insensitive things". I am offended by racially insensitive things being said by anybody (regardless of their race) directed at another race (regardless of which race the insensitive comment is being directed at). The point is about the societal double standard that treats white offenders differently from black ones. In RGIII's case I'm sure this was a true slip of the tongue which he subsequently clarified. He will be forgiven - as he should be - and likely nothing more will happen - as it also should be. The point is RGIII should be treated the same way if he was a white guy that had a slip of the tongue, but most people with at least half of a brain know that wouldn't be the case. And that's the point - the double standard.

---

It's not a double standard because it's not the same offense. And anyone who doesn't understand this is either daft or being intellectually dishonest.

This isn't a difficult concept. You can -- and likely do -- say things about your family and friends you would never let others say. That's because when you say it, it's understood and acknowledged that it's coming from a place of love.

It's not possible for a white person to use a racial slur in a respectful or reverential way. If you're using it in any context, you're in the wrong because people from those communities have made it clear there's no good context for a white person to use them.

A decent person accepts that and moves on without any need to use our defend the use of a word that wasn't in their vocabulary to begin with.

---

Kyler Murray was caught tweeting homophobic slurs when he was 15. I guess we should strip him of his Heisman and kick him out of the NFL if you feel everyone needs to be accountable.

---

If Kyler Murray had been held accountable at any point in his life, he wouldn't be the entitled punk he is today.

Like I said before, I'm all for accountability.

bear2be2 said:

---

Jack Bauer said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Johnny Bear said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Johnny Bear said:

---

Alf said:

---

Bug a boos makes about as much sense as what actually came out of his mouth. He couldn't just say naysayers?
If a white analyst would have made the same mistake it would be the lead story on CNN and been summarily dismissed from the job.

---

And had that been the case, no number of apologies and pleas for forgiveness would ever be enough - the person would automatically be toast.

---

I've never understood the frustration some white boomers experience at the hypothetical prospect of being restricted from saying racially insensitive or demeaning things.

If a white person had said this on air or in public, it would say something completely different about their inner feelings and character. This was a really poor weird choice by Robert, obviously, but no one really believes he looks down on Black people. Unless it's truly a tongue-tie situation, racial slurs don't slip out of the mouths of non-racist white people. That some of you struggle with this concept is truly baffling to me.

---

What's truly baffling to me is how badly someone like you can miss the point entirely.

It's exactly 0% about frustration over being "restricted from saying racially insensitive things". I am offended by racially insensitive things being said by anybody (regardless of their race) directed at another race (regardless of which race the insensitive comment is being directed at). The point is about the societal double standard that treats white offenders differently from black ones. In RGIII's case I'm sure this was a true slip of the tongue which he subsequently clarified. He will be forgiven - as he should be - and likely nothing more will happen - as it also should be. The point is RGIII should be treated the same way if he was a white guy that had a slip of the tongue, but most people with at least half of a brain know that wouldn't be the case. And that's the point - the double standard.

---

It's not a double standard because it's not the same offense. And anyone who doesn't understand this is either daft or being intellectually dishonest.

This isn't a difficult concept. You can -- and likely do -- say things about your family and friends you would never let others say. That's because when you say it, it's understood and acknowledged that it's coming from a place of love.

It's not possible for a white person to use a racial slur in a respectful or reverential way. If you're using it in any context, you're in the wrong because people from those communities have made it clear there's no good context for a white person to use them.

A decent person accepts that and moves on without any need to use our defend the use of a word that wasn't in their vocabulary to begin with.

---

Kyler Murray was caught tweeting homophobic slurs when he was 15. I guess we should strip him of his Heisman and kick him out of the NFL if you feel everyone needs to be accountable.

---

If Kyler Murray had been held accountable at any point in his life, he wouldn't be the entitled punk he is today.

Like I said before, I'm all for accountability.

---

What do you need to pay for in a really big, public, and permanent way?

bear2be2 said:

---

Jack Bauer said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Johnny Bear said:

---

Alf said:

---

Bug a boos makes about as much sense as what actually came out of his mouth. He couldn't just say naysayers?
If a white analyst would have made the same mistake it would be the lead story on CNN and been summarily dismissed from the job.

---

And had that been the case, no number of apologies and pleas for forgiveness would ever be enough - the person would automatically be toast.

---

I've never understood the frustration some white boomers experience at the hypothetical prospect of being restricted from saying racially insensitive or demeaning things.

If a white person had said this on air or in public, it would say something completely different about their inner feelings and character. This was a really poor weird choice by Robert, obviously, but no one really believes he looks down on Black people. Unless it's truly a tongue-tie situation, racial slurs don't slip out of the mouths of non-racist white people. That some of you struggle with this concept is truly baffling to me.

---

I think it's about forgiveness. A HS teenager was uninvited from attending UTennessee because she said the n-word in a snapshot 3 years before.

If we are on a zero tolerance policy, it should be implemented fairly.

---

Forgiveness doesn't require that we grant people who have shown themselves to be racist/hateful special privileges. And admittance to a university -- like employment and patronage of a private business -- is a privilege, not a right.

I'm all for personal growth and forgiveness, but I don't have any problem with holding people accountable for the things they say and do. And again a white person using racial slurs for other races isn't the same thing as someone of the same race doing it. The psychology and motive is completely different.

Anyone who could be caught using racial slurs is racist. And they need to reckon with that. If you're not racist, those words aren't an active part of your vocabulary.

---

I believe everyone is racist. Tribalism is normal. Time to move past all the woke virtue signaling. Culture matters.

Years ago on my elementary school bus I heard some kids (I think they were Hispanic) use the J-word and I was amazed because I hadn't heard that word in about 20 years. Still don't know where they got it.