Attention NAACP

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
I'm not black, I wasn't offended. I also don't give a shit if the Hypersensitive NAACP and Sharpton wants to get their panties in a twist and therefore give all the Hypersensitve Wingnuts in this forum a twist in their panties, it's kind of amusing.

Actually I'd be cool with the firing, but only if we fire all the people who drew Mohamed. After all we can't risk offending people.

The perfect solution is he who is without sin execute all the above trouble makers in the press. I'm sure many here consider themselves a sufficient judge of these situations to ruin, maim or kill because of their own moral superiority.

Everyone needs a hobby.

"All that is required for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing."

Nobody can be free of insult in a free society but it is insults and put downs that destroy children.

Today you insult me, tomorrow my people, and then your insults become de rigueur for the culture and all my people grow up put down and treated like the untouchable in India. With freedom there must be responsibility and wisdom. If you have not the wisdom to see this than you are not wise. Your right to speak must be tempered by my right to be free from the consequences of the unchecked infectiousness of hatred. There are the hypersensitive on one end and the insensate on the other. A balance needs to be maintained. 50 million deaths in Europe have made the Nazi party illegal but skin heads are allowed to march here. Speech on one end needs to be countered by speech on the other, but the power of hate is enormous. If you err on that side you are lost. You will rue the day that racists have no shame.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: LTC8K6

Please link me to "plenty" of such cartoons.

Michelle Malkin has many of the Bush assassination art and cartoons covered.
It's also quite easy to google plenty of them, as I'm sure you know. They were covered fairly widely on the internet, but not in the MSM, and not by the NAACP, and there certainly weren't any protests.

http://michellemalkin.com/cate...ed/assassination-chic/

As far as the race angle, there isn't one in the stimulus bill cartoon, except to those who invented it, so the comparison is quite valid.

There was even a museum/art exhibit regarding assassinating Sarah Palin, IIRC.

There was all sorts of nasty cartoons and art out there that was fine. It even goes back to Bill Clinton's days. Nobody mainstream ever protested it.

The mainstream doesn't suffer racial bigotry. Think!

 

[beyoku]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Where's the cartoon of these two guys, with their real names and addresses, being pushed into their homes with a black mob standing around with torches and the caption reading, "You're Fired!"

! LOL

 

[sapiens74]

Lets discuss the real issue here.

Why were so many blacks offended by the cartoon and so many whites were not. I first thought it was about the idiots in congress and the chimp that was shot a day earlier. Many blacks felt it was a racial slur... Why the disconnect?

Also the real issue needs to be addressed here. We need to be honest and simply say that we cannot make the same jokes or same commentary as we did for Former Presidents.
Bush was compared to a chimp, and rightly so. But if we cannot make those kinds of comparisons due to implied racial tones, than is Obama really equal? Bottom line is we have to treat him differently then former presidents and, at least to me, that makes him seem less of an equal.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
I'm not black, I wasn't offended. I also don't give a shit if the Hypersensitive NAACP and Sharpton wants to get their panties in a twist and therefore give all the Hypersensitve Wingnuts in this forum a twist in their panties, it's kind of amusing.

Actually I'd be cool with the firing, but only if we fire all the people who drew Mohamed. After all we can't risk offending people.

The perfect solution is he who is without sin execute all the above trouble makers in the press. I'm sure many here consider themselves a sufficient judge of these situations to ruin, maim or kill because of their own moral superiority.

Everyone needs a hobby.

"All that is required for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing."

Nobody can be free of insult in a free society but it is insults and put downs that destroy children.

Today you insult me, tomorrow my people, and then your insults become de rigueur for the culture and all my people grow up put down and treated like the untouchable in India. With freedom there must be responsibility and wisdom. If you have not the wisdom to see this than you are not wise. Your right to speak must be tempered by my right to be free from the consequences of the unchecked infectiousness of hatred. There are the hypersensitive on one end and the insensate on the other. A balance needs to be maintained. 50 million deaths in Europe have made the Nazi party illegal but skin heads are allowed to march here. Speech on one end needs to be countered by speech on the other, but the power of hate is enormous. If you err on that side you are lost. You will rue the day that racists have no shame.

Someone once said that freedom of speech without the right to offend is useless. I agree. The sign of a mature society isn't when ignorance no longer speaks, but when people of reason go on in spite of it. Personally I don't see the cartoon as racist. It may be the intent. I cannot say. Therefore I'm not prepared to exact vengeance. I have sinned so I cannot cast that stone. When it comes to Holocausts, I can do so. Now one may look at the result and justify the silencing of anyone whom might possibly (maybe) speak in a way that might possibly (maybe) cause a catastrophe down the road. I'd say that the fear of such things leads to tyranny itself. Fear of hatred does not always lead to the right course of action. Sometimes the hatred of fear is the better choice. Freedom of expression does have a responsibility, but sometimes that responsibility is to make people discuss uncomfortable things.

In any case, if the ignorant were silenced none of us would ever be free to utter a word again.

 

[Drift3r]

Originally posted by: sapiens74
Lets discuss the real issue here.

Why were so many blacks offended by the cartoon and so many whites were not. I first thought it was about the idiots in congress and the chimp that was shot a day earlier. Many blacks felt it was a racial slur... Why the disconnect?

Also the real issue needs to be addressed here. We need to be honest and simply say that we cannot make the same jokes or same commentary as we did for Former Presidents.
Bush was compared to a chimp, and rightly so. But if we cannot make those kinds of comparisons due to implied racial tones, than is Obama really equal? Bottom line is we have to treat him differently then former presidents and, at least to me, that makes him seem less of an equal.

A Double standard does not breed equality. In fact it further widens the divide between people in this country. Implying that Obama needs to be treated differently because of his skin color is not only racist but condescending. Also your assertion that the cartoon had anything to do with Obama is false and has not been proven at all in any logical and factual way. This whole matter was only linked to Obama by those who want to continue to make race an issue and make themselves relevant when they have nothing else to offer to society.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: sapiens74
Lets discuss the real issue here.

Why were so many blacks offended by the cartoon and so many whites were not. I first thought it was about the idiots in congress and the chimp that was shot a day earlier. Many blacks felt it was a racial slur... Why the disconnect?

Also the real issue needs to be addressed here. We need to be honest and simply say that we cannot make the same jokes or same commentary as we did for Former Presidents.
Bush was compared to a chimp, and rightly so. But if we cannot make those kinds of comparisons due to implied racial tones, than is Obama really equal? Bottom line is we have to treat him differently then former presidents and, at least to me, that makes him seem less of an equal.

What your poor logc is missing here is the fact that treating him the same means that the different race he is has to be taken into account.

It's a little like if the first woman president were elected and when she passed a civil rights bill, a cartoon showed her naked in a sex act with a gang of black men.

In other words, her gender opens the door for new attacks. The proper response for 'equality' isn't for male presidents to be subject to the same cartoon.

Perhaps a better analogy is the first gay president having his sexual orientation used in an implied way playing on the bigotry against gays. The proper response isn't to say that gay cartoons weren't an issue with heterosexual presidents. Of course not, they weren't gay. It's that the president can be crticized for his policies, and that the bigotry is a problem.

The double standard isn't about that it's ok to compare Bush to a monkey but not Obama; it's about the inequality that there's a history of monkeys used for blacks, not whites.

 

[alchemize]

Originally posted by: Don Vito Corleone

Originally posted by: LTC8K6
There were plenty of cartoons and "art" regarding killing George Bush.

Not a peep...

Please link me to "plenty" of such cartoons. Hell, I'll settle for five - surely you can come up with more than that, since they were, according to you, so plentiful. Even if you were right - which I don't believe you are - it would be missing the point, in that the racial component would be totally missing.

How about an entire movie about him being killed?

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: Drift3r

A Double standard does not breed equality. Implying that Obama needs to be treated differently because of his skin color is not only racist but condescending. Also your assertion that the cartoon had anything to do with Obama is false and has not been proven at all in any logical and factual way. This whole matter was only linked to Obama by those who want to continue to make race an issue and make themselves relevant when they have nothing else to offer to society.

Why don't you name the animal that corresponds to monkeys and blacks, for whites? Which animal could be used for a white president that has similar history of racism?

Oh ya, there isn't one.

Blacks have long been the target of racism; whites haven't. It's your views that are not taking the facts into account.

The simple fact is that implied racist references with monkey caroons aren't ok whether it's about the black president or about a random black guy.

The fact that Obama is president and black and that the president has a lot o latitude about political attacks doesn't suddenly create an 'ok' loophole for racism.

 

[Drift3r]

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: sapiens74
Lets discuss the real issue here.

Why were so many blacks offended by the cartoon and so many whites were not. I first thought it was about the idiots in congress and the chimp that was shot a day earlier. Many blacks felt it was a racial slur... Why the disconnect?

Also the real issue needs to be addressed here. We need to be honest and simply say that we cannot make the same jokes or same commentary as we did for Former Presidents.
Bush was compared to a chimp, and rightly so. But if we cannot make those kinds of comparisons due to implied racial tones, than is Obama really equal? Bottom line is we have to treat him differently then former presidents and, at least to me, that makes him seem less of an equal.

What your poor logc is missing here is the fact that treating him the same means that the different race he is has to be taken into account.

It's a little like if the first woman president were elected and when she passed a civil rights bill, a cartoon showed her naked in a sex act with a gang of black men.

In other words, her gender opens the door for new attacks. The proper response for 'equality' isn't for male presidents to be subject to the same cartoon.

Perhaps a better analogy is the first gay president having his sexual orientation used in an implied way playing on the bigotry against gays. The proper response isn't to say that gay cartoons weren't an issue with heterosexual presidents. Of course not, they weren't gay. It's that the president can be crticized for his policies, and that the bigotry is a problem.

The double standard isn't about that it's ok to compare Bush to a monkey but not Obama; it's about the inequality that there's a history of monkeys used for blacks, not whites.

Yet the issue is that the cartoon was in no way referencing Obama.

 

[Drift3r]

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: Drift3r

A Double standard does not breed equality. Implying that Obama needs to be treated differently because of his skin color is not only racist but condescending. Also your assertion that the cartoon had anything to do with Obama is false and has not been proven at all in any logical and factual way. This whole matter was only linked to Obama by those who want to continue to make race an issue and make themselves relevant when they have nothing else to offer to society.

Why don't you name the animal that corresponds to monkeys and blacks, for whites? Which animal could be used for a white president that has similar history of racism?

Oh ya, there isn't one.

Blacks have long been the target of racism; whites haven't. It's your views that are not taking the facts into account.

The simple fact is that implied racist references with monkey caroons aren't ok whether it's about the black president or about a random black guy.

The fact that Obama is president and black and that the president has a lot o latitude about political attacks doesn't suddenly create an 'ok' loophole for racism.

This would all mean sometime if you could directly or even indirectly link the cartoon to Obama and not the authors of the stimulus package in Congress. You are leaping to conclusions that have not yet have been proven in anyway whatsoever.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: Drift3r
Yet the issue is that the cartoon was in no way referencing Obama.

As I said in an earlier post, I was discussing the issue if for the sake of argument there is a 'sneaky racism' in it.

The action I said I'd like to see if for the publication to say that there was no racism intended, and to explain the reason for tying a monkey shooting to government policy.

If they want to say that the monkey was chosen to represent idiocy among leaders, fine.

The man behind the stimulus package design is Obama. If he let Congress design it, that doesn't change that it's 'his baby'.

As with much 'implied racism', you can argue either way; some are real and some are not.

If you can agree that the implied racism would be wrong if that were the message, and that the publication should say it was not the message, then we're in agreement.

Since your defense is that it wasn't what's wrong with asking the publication to say the same thing you said?

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
I'm not black, I wasn't offended. I also don't give a shit if the Hypersensitive NAACP and Sharpton wants to get their panties in a twist and therefore give all the Hypersensitve Wingnuts in this forum a twist in their panties, it's kind of amusing.

Actually I'd be cool with the firing, but only if we fire all the people who drew Mohamed. After all we can't risk offending people.

The perfect solution is he who is without sin execute all the above trouble makers in the press. I'm sure many here consider themselves a sufficient judge of these situations to ruin, maim or kill because of their own moral superiority.

Everyone needs a hobby.

"All that is required for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing."

Nobody can be free of insult in a free society but it is insults and put downs that destroy children.

Today you insult me, tomorrow my people, and then your insults become de rigueur for the culture and all my people grow up put down and treated like the untouchable in India. With freedom there must be responsibility and wisdom. If you have not the wisdom to see this than you are not wise. Your right to speak must be tempered by my right to be free from the consequences of the unchecked infectiousness of hatred. There are the hypersensitive on one end and the insensate on the other. A balance needs to be maintained. 50 million deaths in Europe have made the Nazi party illegal but skin heads are allowed to march here. Speech on one end needs to be countered by speech on the other, but the power of hate is enormous. If you err on that side you are lost. You will rue the day that racists have no shame.

Someone once said that freedom of speech without the right to offend is useless. I agree. The sign of a mature society isn't when ignorance no longer speaks, but when people of reason go on in spite of it. Personally I don't see the cartoon as racist. It may be the intent. I cannot say. Therefore I'm not prepared to exact vengeance. I have sinned so I cannot cast that stone. When it comes to Holocausts, I can do so. Now one may look at the result and justify the silencing of anyone whom might possibly (maybe) speak in a way that might possibly (maybe) cause a catastrophe down the road. I'd say that the fear of such things leads to tyranny itself. Fear of hatred does not always lead to the right course of action. Sometimes the hatred of fear is the better choice. Freedom of expression does have a responsibility, but sometimes that responsibility is to make people discuss uncomfortable things.

In any case, if the ignorant were silenced none of us would ever be free to utter a word again.

If we are to have responsibility how do we achieve it. What tools does our society use to insure it? There is a price to be paid for shouting fire in a theater. You can't claim you didn't see how people would react. Who has the right to bring the guilty to task? You seem to want to shirk the duty, claiming you don't know what is in those folks minds. But it doesn't really matter. Somebody shouted fire in a theater. Ergo?

 

[OCGuy]

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: Drift3r
Yet the issue is that the cartoon was in no way referencing Obama.

As I said in an earlier post, I was discussing the issue if for the sake of argument there is a 'sneaky racism' in it.

Sneaky racism? :laugh:


This is seriously getting good now. I think I may enjoy the next 4 more than I originally thought.

 

[Drift3r]

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: Drift3r
Yet the issue is that the cartoon was in no way referencing Obama.

As I said in an earlier post, I was discussing the issue if for the sake of argument there is a 'sneaky racism' in it.

The action I said I'd like to see if for the publication to say that there was no racism intended, and to explain the reason for tying a monkey shooting to government policy.

If they want to say that the monkey was chosen to represent idiocy among leaders, fine.

The man behind the stimulus package design is Obama. If he let Congress design it, that doesn't change that it's 'his baby'.

As with much 'implied racism', you can argue either way; some are real and some are not.

If you can agree that the implied racism would be wrong if that were the message, and that the publication should say it was not the message, then we're in agreement.

Since your defense is that it wasn't what's wrong with asking the publication to say the same thing you said?

They did respond but I have feeling you aren't looking for what you claimed you need to make you feel better about the issue. Oh and while Obama may have had a say in suggesting what he wanted to see in the stimulus bill everyone should know that the true authors are those in Congress since the president doesn't create bills he just signs them or casts his veto option.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200..._en_ot/ny_post_cartoon

Col Allan, editor-in-chief of the Post, defended the work.

"The cartoon is a clear parody of a current news event, to wit the shooting of a violent chimpanzee in Connecticut," Allan said in a statement. "It broadly mocks Washington's efforts to revive the economy. Again, Al Sharpton reveals himself as nothing more than a publicity opportunist."

 

[LTC8K6]

Think!

No!

 

[spacejamz]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
I'm not black, I wasn't offended. I also don't give a shit if the Hypersensitive NAACP and Sharpton wants to get their panties in a twist and therefore give all the Hypersensitve Wingnuts in this forum a twist in their panties, it's kind of amusing.

Actually I'd be cool with the firing, but only if we fire all the people who drew Mohamed. After all we can't risk offending people.

The perfect solution is he who is without sin execute all the above trouble makers in the press. I'm sure many here consider themselves a sufficient judge of these situations to ruin, maim or kill because of their own moral superiority.

Everyone needs a hobby.

"All that is required for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing."

Nobody can be free of insult in a free society but it is insults and put downs that destroy children.

Today you insult me, tomorrow my people, and then your insults become de rigueur for the culture and all my people grow up put down and treated like the untouchable in India. With freedom there must be responsibility and wisdom. If you have not the wisdom to see this than you are not wise. Your right to speak must be tempered by my right to be free from the consequences of the unchecked infectiousness of hatred. There are the hypersensitive on one end and the insensate on the other. A balance needs to be maintained. 50 million deaths in Europe have made the Nazi party illegal but skin heads are allowed to march here. Speech on one end needs to be countered by speech on the other, but the power of hate is enormous. If you err on that side you are lost. You will rue the day that racists have no shame.

Someone once said that freedom of speech without the right to offend is useless. I agree. The sign of a mature society isn't when ignorance no longer speaks, but when people of reason go on in spite of it. Personally I don't see the cartoon as racist. It may be the intent. I cannot say. Therefore I'm not prepared to exact vengeance. I have sinned so I cannot cast that stone. When it comes to Holocausts, I can do so. Now one may look at the result and justify the silencing of anyone whom might possibly (maybe) speak in a way that might possibly (maybe) cause a catastrophe down the road. I'd say that the fear of such things leads to tyranny itself. Fear of hatred does not always lead to the right course of action. Sometimes the hatred of fear is the better choice. Freedom of expression does have a responsibility, but sometimes that responsibility is to make people discuss uncomfortable things.

In any case, if the ignorant were silenced none of us would ever be free to utter a word again.

If we are to have responsibility how do we achieve it. What tools does our society use to insure it? There is a price to be paid for shouting fire in a theater. You can't claim you didn't see how people would react. Who has the right to bring the guilty to task? You seem to want to shirk the duty, claiming you don't know what is in those folks minds. But it doesn't really matter. Somebody shouted fire in a theater. Ergo?

How will a tasteless comic strip cause a stampede that will kill someone?

Answer: It won't (unless the offended parties march down the street, protesting the comic strip and loot an ethnic hair salon or something...ooopsss)..

The only people that are offended by this comic strip are the ones that want to find fault with it. For example, somoene who wants to compare a life threatening situation against a comic strip. It's a freakin' comic strip for cryin out loud. It bothers you, just throw it away...it's really not that difficult...

This problem will never go away if people are always looking for something to find fault with....

Who ever mentioned earlier about crying wolf (which this definitely was) hit the nail on the head...

 

[sapiens74]

Originally posted by: Drift3r

Originally posted by: sapiens74
Lets discuss the real issue here.

Why were so many blacks offended by the cartoon and so many whites were not. I first thought it was about the idiots in congress and the chimp that was shot a day earlier. Many blacks felt it was a racial slur... Why the disconnect?

Also the real issue needs to be addressed here. We need to be honest and simply say that we cannot make the same jokes or same commentary as we did for Former Presidents.
Bush was compared to a chimp, and rightly so. But if we cannot make those kinds of comparisons due to implied racial tones, than is Obama really equal? Bottom line is we have to treat him differently then former presidents and, at least to me, that makes him seem less of an equal.

A Double standard does not breed equality. In fact it further widens the divide between people in this country. Implying that Obama needs to be treated differently because of his skin color is not only racist but condescending. Also your assertion that the cartoon had anything to do with Obama is false and has not been proven at all in any logical and factual way. This whole matter was only linked to Obama by those who want to continue to make race an issue and make themselves relevant when they have nothing else to offer to society.

Not sure you read my post correctly. I thought the cartoon had nothing to do with Obama, I didn't see the connection, but a lot of people did. I am curious why I didn't think it alluded to Obama but many black Americans did.

I think he should be treated equally, I was stating it's not right to treat Obama differently, actually agreeing with your follow up point that it is implying racism....

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: Don Vito Corleone

Please link me to "plenty" of such cartoons. Hell, I'll settle for five - surely you can come up with more than that, since they were, according to you, so plentiful. Even if you were right - which I don't believe you are - it would be missing the point, in that the racial component would be totally missing.

How about an entire movie about him being killed?

First, that movie (Death of a President) is not some kind of comedy - it treats Bush's assassination as a national tragedy. It's not about how funny it would be if the President were killed, and it's as politically agnostic as a movie about the assassination of a sitting President could be.

Second, that movie was roundly condemned - none other than Hilary Clinton called it "despicable," and Rush Limbaugh said it was illegal and should be banned.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: spacejamz

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
I'm not black, I wasn't offended. I also don't give a shit if the Hypersensitive NAACP and Sharpton wants to get their panties in a twist and therefore give all the Hypersensitve Wingnuts in this forum a twist in their panties, it's kind of amusing.

Actually I'd be cool with the firing, but only if we fire all the people who drew Mohamed. After all we can't risk offending people.

The perfect solution is he who is without sin execute all the above trouble makers in the press. I'm sure many here consider themselves a sufficient judge of these situations to ruin, maim or kill because of their own moral superiority.

Everyone needs a hobby.

"All that is required for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing."

Nobody can be free of insult in a free society but it is insults and put downs that destroy children.

Today you insult me, tomorrow my people, and then your insults become de rigueur for the culture and all my people grow up put down and treated like the untouchable in India. With freedom there must be responsibility and wisdom. If you have not the wisdom to see this than you are not wise. Your right to speak must be tempered by my right to be free from the consequences of the unchecked infectiousness of hatred. There are the hypersensitive on one end and the insensate on the other. A balance needs to be maintained. 50 million deaths in Europe have made the Nazi party illegal but skin heads are allowed to march here. Speech on one end needs to be countered by speech on the other, but the power of hate is enormous. If you err on that side you are lost. You will rue the day that racists have no shame.

Someone once said that freedom of speech without the right to offend is useless. I agree. The sign of a mature society isn't when ignorance no longer speaks, but when people of reason go on in spite of it. Personally I don't see the cartoon as racist. It may be the intent. I cannot say. Therefore I'm not prepared to exact vengeance. I have sinned so I cannot cast that stone. When it comes to Holocausts, I can do so. Now one may look at the result and justify the silencing of anyone whom might possibly (maybe) speak in a way that might possibly (maybe) cause a catastrophe down the road. I'd say that the fear of such things leads to tyranny itself. Fear of hatred does not always lead to the right course of action. Sometimes the hatred of fear is the better choice. Freedom of expression does have a responsibility, but sometimes that responsibility is to make people discuss uncomfortable things.

In any case, if the ignorant were silenced none of us would ever be free to utter a word again.

If we are to have responsibility how do we achieve it. What tools does our society use to insure it? There is a price to be paid for shouting fire in a theater. You can't claim you didn't see how people would react. Who has the right to bring the guilty to task? You seem to want to shirk the duty, claiming you don't know what is in those folks minds. But it doesn't really matter. Somebody shouted fire in a theater. Ergo?

How will a tasteless comic strip cause a stampede that will kill someone?

Answer: It won't (unless the offended parties march down the street, protesting the comic strip and loot an ethnic hair salon or something...ooopsss)..

The only people that are offended by this comic strip are the ones that want to find fault with it. For example, somoene who wants to compare a life threatening situation against a comic strip. It's a freakin' comic strip for cryin out loud. It bothers you, just throw it away...it's really not that difficult...

This problem will never go away if people are always looking for something to find fault with....

Who ever mentioned earlier about crying wolf (which this definitely was) hit the nail on the head...

You asshole, that's how Hitler rose to power.

 

[Moonbeam]

It's amusing that the folk on the right, famous for their racism, fail to see the racism here. Sort of like a donkey wondering why he always caries the load.

 

[OutHouse]

how many times was Bush drawn as a chimp and in now many main stream publications????

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: Citrix
how many times was Bush drawn as a chimp and in now many main stream publications????

What possible relevance can that have, where's he's white? I don't have a hair trigger when it comes to race, but there's an obvious difference between portraying a white person as an ape and portraying a black person as one.

I wouldn't have a problem with a mocking cartoon of Obama based on his physical attributes - say, portraying him as an elephant because of his big ears. An ape is something else in light of the fact that that exact term has been used by racists to refer to black people. The fact that he was a rogue ape that had been shot to death is another issue entirely, of course, and I wouldn't condone a cartoon that depicted a murdered GWB either.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
It's amusing that the folk on the right, famous for their racism, fail to see the racism here. Sort of like a donkey wondering why he always caries the load.

This isn't a Left/Right issue...it's common sense issue. To a hammer everything looks like a nail. No racism intended...no racism found. Think!

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
It's amusing that the folk on the right, famous for their racism, fail to see the racism here. Sort of like a donkey wondering why he always caries the load.

This isn't a Left/Right issue...it's common sense issue. To a hammer everything looks like a nail. No racism intended...no racism found. Think!

He can't - he likes to "feel" - not think.