We can only hope that he makes a crack about cystic fibrosis and gets a Boomer fist in his glib, racist mouth.

You know what our community needs?? An Al Sharpton-type figure. I remind me of a young Al Sharpton sometimes.

you're great and all, abhi, but my vote goes for mr. zed.

but i do agree with your point - this model minority, don't-speak-up attitude/situation has not gotten us much respect as a community. add to that apu, our 'foreign' ways and the fact that we tend to inhabit rather unpowerful industries (to name just a few factors)- of course cbs doesn't care what this guy has said about desis. most americans, besides desis, don't really care too much, either. it's a bit of a quandary, actually - 'fitting in' whilst simultaneously gaining respect for our culture.

So in summary, racism is good for radio

I vote for Dinesh D'Souza to take on the smiling takla. :)

wait -- you mean the replacement for Imus is a skinhead?

DesiInNJ,
Boy that was some rant. But sorry If i dont share your pessimistic and self-hating assessment. As far as being stared at by a "Kallu" as you so nicely put it, even "goras" are afraid of being looked at by a "Kallu". I bet you $100 no white guy would dare venture into Camden, downtown MoTown or South Central LA after dark. Argued against by a "chinki", what the hell is that supposed to mean? Arguing about what?. Neither me nor my friends have backed down against debates against Asian people or otherwise. As far as shouted down by a gora is concerned it depends on the circumstance,but I would rather dial 911 and report the guy rather than get into a fist-fight with some racist loser and risk deportation. Indians are only good at earning a middle class salary? What are white,black and asian americans good at other than earning a living too can I ask? Desis are by no means timid. One guy I know broke the jaw of a racist who called him a camel f****g raghead,of course his ass landed promptly in jail and after that he was deported. Gee, that sure showed the gora the brave desi,didnt it? Who do you think was the real loser in this confrontation?

[Admin note: The comment this comment is referring to was deleted]

We need a Sharpton like figure for Satendar Singh type incidents, not necessarily for this schmuck. Can someone give us a list of his greatest bigotry hits?

Don't ever wish for a Sharpton like on your side. He will pick your pockets. Plus he is the most racist of anyone

Between the $65 million sunk into that moron Katie Couric and the $20 million spent on Imus , CBS sure knows how to spend its money well. Carton must be already figuring how to get fired and laugh all the way to the bank with a huge settlement. Only in America.

I didn't read the "here, here, here and here" links but is this the same guy that called a call-center and abused some poor woman for kicks? Because if so, viral campaigning and my mom told me that it was wrong!

Also, I'm from N. Virginia and after the ridiculously lame way that the community handled the Macaca situation. That's when we needed an Al Sharpton the most. Instead, we had a bunch of rich business men sitting around a table telling Mr. Allen that he should do more PR in the Indian-American community and all would be forgiven/forgotten. Appalling.

I think the problem is that as a broadly affluent community, our leadership (and I'm talking about the USINPAC's and such) doesn't represent the lowest or newest segments, if they happen to remember at all that they exist. Not to mention we're genetically predisposed to hints of Anglophilia.... I'm just sayin'!

@ #6

Ummm...the folks you address your comment to is very close to the company's name I work for. I just want to clarify to all it wasn't me who wrote that.

I agree with you. Another way to put it is that the desi community needs an Abe Foxman or an Oprah Winfrey -two people that advocate for good representation for their communities in the media without creating negative scandals in the process.

Let the markets rule. If he does well, it is just a reflection of the underlying bias in the society and if anything his success will bring forth the issue from it's latent state and that's where the community should step up and make a huge noise. The recent Simpsons 7-11 thing should have been used better to highlight the communities problems.

In the meantime, there is wonderful NPR.

Ardy, wouldn't Abhi himself be part of the market, distributing a media product criticizing CBS Radio for employing Craig Carton as a national radio personality?

But isn't xenophobia the new "acceptable" shock element used to increase ratings post-9/11(the way Jerry Springer smut was a few years ago). Look at Ann Coulter or if you want to take the Canadian context, take a look at gay basher Michael Coren. Why is this surprising?

disagree with Ardy #13. Human nature is such that once people say things, they are wont to defend it for a long time, even though the initial statement was made without much thought. Beter to not let the masses subscribe to a racist viewpoint in the first place thank to launch a generation-long battle against it afterwards.

Abhi, I think part of the reason that we don't have a Sharpton-esque character is because we can't even get the larger desi community as a whole to acknowledge that a) we are not a model minority, and by extension, b) we live in a racist society, yes, one that includes anti-desi racism. At least the larger African American community in the U.S. has some sort of consensus on the fact that things are historically and presently messed up. I'm by no means reducing their viewpoints to one distilled thing, but there is some level of group consciousness, for the vast majority, that things are not all right. Desi rabble-rousers are more often, in my experience, told to shut up than supported for being outspoken. My hope is that this will change as a larger third and fourth generation emerges.

Not to mention we're genetically predisposed to hints of Anglophilia.... I'm just sayin'!

I know those are sweeping generalizations, but I'm just trying to voice a larger underlying trend. I know this is not true of everyone, nor the community as a whole (necessarily) or in specific localities, but it seems that many of those who seek power/influence ascribe to this viewpoint more often than they do to the Sharpton viewpoint. We have local heroes everywhere, but in my opinion, not enough of them. However, I've definitely seen this trend shift, particularly with the second- and third-generation.

perhaps it's because the "desi" community is really not so homogenous, and the various browns associate/conglomerate by their linguistic/cultural identities.

moreover, we're plagued by our intra-racism, where certain complexities exist between the north/south, "aryan/dravidian", caste affiliation, etc.

so, perhaps, there exists a certain collective understanding that we should get our own house in shape before casting any stones.

but yeah, to answer the question, i would think SAJA would be well suited to lead any uproar or protest.

http://www.thisjustin.com/2007/06/20/race-flag/

To the question: Why don't we have an Al Sharptonesque character?
My answer is: There's a problem with the third word in the question. It does not have any meaning.

Translation: There is no "we". Ours is an individualistic culture, which is why desis form a seamless transition to Americanism, since America was found on the basis of individualism. Each of us want to have our own way of living, interpreting events and at the end, attain Nirvana or Moksha. There's a good reason for the Model Minority tag: Most desis consider themselves to be a minority of one.

So let other people have their high priests: the Sharptons, the CAIR's, this coalition, that association - to make statements on the group's behalf.

I don't want anyone to speak on my behalf. Certainly not SAJA!!

M. Nam

MoorNam - that's a cliche with little basis in truth. If Indians had little sense of 'we', India would not be such a stable, rich, democratic nation state. Indians would not have united so effectively to defeat the British. And yes, communal carnage continues to this day, social infrastructure is still extraordinarily weak, people still behave in a Darwinist fashion - but each year, things change. More and more government subsidies and programs are being created to take care of marginalized groups and the poor. There are active and deepening movements to protect the rights of gays, women, religious and linguistic minorities. I would suggest to you that once Indian society, across class lines, becomes sufficiently affluent - India will prove to be the most socially progressive nation on the planet.

That said, it is surprising that we don't have our own North American version of the NAACP. Perhaps it is that Indians do so well in general. Educational and career achievement can dull you to cultural marginalization.

News flash Sharpton does not speak for all black people,But is is good at time to have a mouth peice instead of just rolling over and being a good little model minority. If you don't stand for nothing you will fall for anything.

Time= times typo.

If Indians had little sense of 'we', India would not be such a stable, rich, democratic nation state.

Rich, you say? Hahahaha! Now, that's rich! (Pun intended)

'Rich' doesn't equal 'fairly distributed', De Moron-ay (pun intended).

In the development economics literature, it is fair to say that a country is called "rich" if and only if the average (or, at a minimum, the modal) income level across the entire population of that country is equivalent to sufficient level of consumption to ensure a moderately prosperous standard of living. Hence, Japan is a "rich" country, Germany is a "rich" country, Australia is a "rich" country, etc. Properly speaking, rich countries are those in which most of the people are prosperous.

On the other hand, countries in which the majority (or modal) level of consumption is below the minimum necessary for a secure and comfortable existence are called "poor". Lesotho is poor, Cameroon is poor, India is poor, etc. BTW the fact that *some* people in India are very wealthy does not change anything. Most, in fact nearly all, poor countries have an elite class and many of them have a prosperous consumer class as well, but the majority remains moderately to severely impoverished, thus justifying use of the term "poor country."

If Indians had little sense of 'we', India would not be such a stable, rich, democratic nation state..........I would suggest to you that once Indian society, across class lines, becomes sufficiently affluent - India will prove to be the most socially progressive nation on the planet.

India is a "rich nation"?? LOL.

Not only are you seriously delusional but you are also pathetically illogical. If India is already rich why the caveat of "once India becomes...sufficiently affluent"? Try to think a little before posting and making a fool of yourself.

Look who's back.

Prema, try thinking before you make yourself look like an arsehole. That would defeat the whole point, though, wouldn't it? Since the only reason you seem to come on here is to insult and aggravate others.

The word 'rich' doesn't have one meaning. It is not ALWAYS used in a manner consistent with 'development economics'. It can mean vibrant, resource-rich, dynamic - any number of things. But being a goggle-eyed, belligerent, frustrated little nerd - you wouldn't get that, would you Prema?

I don't know who's worse, Imus or this idiot Carton. I always listen to NPR and really don't have time to listen to anything else (other than ESPN radio shows).

This Jersey guy needs to wear a white dunce cap and a white sheet.

try thinking before you make yourself look like an arsehole

The loathsome "arseholes" are desis like you who keep insisting that India is rich, India is shining, the "world is in awe" of India and other such stupid brazen lies.....while the ground reality is that India is backward and impoverished even by third world standards and leads the world in hunger, malnutrition, human degradation etc.

It can mean vibrant, resource-rich, dynamic - any number of things. But being a goggle-eyed, belligerent, frustrated little nerd - you wouldn't get that, would you

Nobody got that, because thats obviously not what you meant you lying fraud. Else explain why you tried to idiotically defend your claim that India is rich, with "'Rich' doesn't equal 'fairly distributed'"??

You are still making a fool of yourself because you are still not thinking rationally.

Nobody got that, because thats obviously not what you meant you lying fraud. Else explain why you tried to idiotically defend your claim that India is rich, with "'Rich' doesn't equal 'fairly distributed'"??

Don Imus said China is bad too. Not saying I agree but if Don Imus says it, right?

I'm all for an equal opportunity offender comic on the radio; however the "Jersey Guy" is a bigot. He is a polarizing fascist. For Imus, Indians/Asians/Latinos weren't on the radar screen. He was obsessed with the cowboy-era image of America... a la Reagan. Imus went vegetarian a few years back, and the moron didn't realize/know of the 1000+ years of vegetarian cuisine of the East. For Imus, South Asians (SA) will always be the towel-head kurta wearing buffoons with an occasional Nehru "statesman" thrown in.

Carton is a more sinister individual... his goal is to reduce the SA population to buffoon status. Carton is the classic plantation owner: he wants to enjoy the fruits of the cheap/quality labor, but not accept them as Americans.

-- Who do we contact to express our dismay at his selection?

Second item -- why the HELL would we want a Al Sharpton? He's a caricature constructed by the right-wing media. The right-wing trots him out (news shows, newspaper, magazines, etc.) to reduce the argument to buffoon status. The African-American community has MILLIONS of smart articulate individuals, but if the right-wing brings them into the discussion the contrast/histrionic value Sharpton brings is lost. Sharpton is a pawn of the media.

The Indian community has not found its voice... most of us are too immersed in the upper echelons of this society to realize that the vast majority of Americans (between the coasts and south of Chicago and north of Dallas) have an unformed/antiquated image of SAs. We have to use Jewish model, forming strong organizations will bring us the influence... The evolution of these organization is still several decades away... too many SAs are still tribal separating themselves by religion, language and class.

Prema - you really hate yourself, don'tcha? The self-loathing, the inferiority complex and all-round nastiness which emanate from you are very sad.

The first 'rich' was meant generically - as in, vibrant, full, dynamic. There was no precise economic or social reality meant. Then, in response to De Moron-ay's jab, I pointed out the obvious, using the term as HE had used it. The two uses were entirely distinct.