Cartoon Uproar and Outrage

[Mabus]

Al Sharpton is at it again (allong with several other of the usual media-whore subjects), going after a cartoon by Sean Delonas.

http://www.nypost.com/delonas/2009/02/02182009.jpg

"Being that the stimulus bill has been the first legislative victory of President Barack Obama and has become synonymous with him, it is not a reach to wonder are they inferring that a monkey wrote the last bill?" -Sharpton

"Do you really think I'm saying Obama should be shot? I didn't see that in the cartoon. It's about the economic stimulus bill. If you're going to make that about anybody, it would be Pelosi, which it's not." -Delonas

"I think this cartoon is inflammatory, inappropriate and irresponsible. It recalls deeply offensive negative stereotypes of African Americans characterized as monkeys and is seemingly directed at our first black president who championed the economic recovery stimulus bill. It also brings to mind racially charged police brutality incidents involving Black men who were recklessly shot by New York City police officers." -Lorraine Cole, YWCA's CEO

"absolutely friggin' ridiculous." -Delonas

I don't see any resemblance to Obama in the cartoon at all. (Well, maybe the ears... ;) ) Perhaps Sharpton (and the others) should examine their own issues.

I am sure there was equal outrage from the left over this:
http://www.bushorchimp.com/images/pic33.jpg

The cartoonist says it was not about Obama, but instead it was about the stimulus. Murdoch apologizes anyway. Sharpton says the apology is not accepted.

Good thing he didn't do a Denmark "Mohammed cartoon".
http://www.humanevents.com/images/islm_sm_cartoon_7.gif

Or he could be in violation of a UN Resolution.

What a world.

[Miscast]

That's the chimp that ripped that woman's face off !

http://forum.gsplayers.com/showthread.php?t=40270&highlight=chimp+shit

[Parkbandit]

I defend the right for someone to say, draw, print what they want.. but let's be honest, it's racial in nature.

[Mtenda]

I have to agree on the irresponsible part of it. It likely wasn't the cartoonists intention to paint Obama as a monkey that needs to be shot but it's easy to see how it could be perceived that way.

[Parkbandit]

I have to agree on the irresponsible part of it. It likely wasn't the cartoonists intention to paint Obama as a monkey that needs to be shot but it's easy to see how it could be perceived that way.


If the cartoonist's intention wasn't to paint Obama as the monkey.. who's the monkey then?

[Fallen]

It was terrifically racist and highly offensive ... so what? Freedom of speech, anyone?

[Mtenda]

If the cartoonist's intention wasn't to paint Obama as the monkey.. who's the monkey then?

Good question. Could they really be that blatant about it?

[Fallen]

>>The cartoonist says it was not about Obama, but instead it was about the stimulus. Murdoch apologizes anyway. Sharpton says the apology is not accepted. >>

I don't understand this snippet. How can one man accept or reject an apology for an entire race? Is there a white/brown/asian acquivalent?

[Mtenda]

It was terrifically racist and highly offensive ... so what? Freedom of speech, anyone?

Absolutely. But attention should definitely be brought to it for what it is.

[Drew]

If the cartoonist's intention wasn't to paint Obama as the monkey.. who's the monkey then?



A monkey is an idiot. The stimulus bill was idiotic. That's the point the cartoonist is trying to make IMO.


Probably best to stop using monkeys as dimwits for the next 4 to 8 years though.

[Fallen]

Absolutely. But attention should definitely be brought to it for what it is.

Really? Some ass-clown cartoonist made a racist cartoon. This country is full of ass-clown racists. That he denies that he originally meant to infer the monkey was Obama either makes him an idiot or a liar. Either way, again, I ask, who cares?

This guy isn't speaking for anyone but himself and whatever paper was stupid (or smart, if you believe all publicity is good publicity) in which it was printed. I guess I can see the validity of wanting to discuss the cartoon, but to what end? To point out it is racist? To point out there are people who are racist?

What is Sharpton's goal if not to seek an apology? (he rejected it, apparently) It just feels like he is pointing out the obvious.

[CrystalTears]

A monkey is an idiot. The stimulus bill was idiotic. That's the point the cartoonist is trying to make IMO.

Probably best to stop using monkeys as dimwits for the next 4 to 8 years though.
That's how I understood it as well.

But yes, may as well not draw monkeys in a bad light until Obama is no longer in office.

Since when are cartoons serious business?

[Fallen]

That's how I understood it as well.

But yes, may as well not draw monkeys in a bad light until Obama is no longer in office.

Since when are cartoons serious business?

Since that dude made one for Muhamed(sp?, I know I am lazy and retarded)

[Tolwynn]

What is Sharpton's goal if not to seek an apology? (he rejected it, apparently) It just feels like he is pointing out the obvious.

To whore for more attention under the veil of righteous indignation, perhaps?

[NocturnalRob]

To whore for more attention under the veil of righteous indignation, perhaps?
:yeahthat:

I'm pretty sure Sharpton just waits around for opportunities such as these.

[Mtenda]

Really? Some ass-clown cartoonist made a racist cartoon. This country is full of ass-clown racists. That he denies that he originally meant to infer the monkey was Obama either makes him an idiot or a liar. Either way, again, I ask, who cares?

This guy isn't speaking for anyone but himself and whatever paper was stupid (or smart, if you believe all publicity is good publicity) in which it was printed. I guess I can see the validity of wanting to discuss the cartoon, but to what end? To point out it is racist? To point out there are people who are racist?

What is Sharpton's goal if not to seek an apology? (he rejected it, apparently) It just feels like he is pointing out the obvious.

I think people want to instinctively roll their eyes at Sharpton and it may be deserved considering he has shown in the past that he does not know how to pick his battles. However, Sharpton aside, I do think that some people would care about this enough to want to point out the problem with it.

[Fallen]

I think people want to instinctively roll their eyes at Sharpton and it may be deserved considering he has shown in the past that he does not know how to pick his battles. However, Sharpton aside, I do think that some people would care about this enough to want to point out the problem with it.

I suppose people will see this cartoon and think to themselves, "Racism is still very much alive and well in the United States/World/whatever"

The problem with this line of thinking is that racism will NEVER EVER EVEEER go away. There will ALWAYS be idiots, bigots, and those that pick physical attributes, religious beliefs, personal lifestyle choices, etc as a reason to take adverse actions against another. It will never go away.

With the information age being the way it is, 1 person can spread cartoons like the above to tens of millions. As so long as one person has access to the internet they can put out as much hate speech (which is a bit strong of a phrase to use to describe the cartoon) as they please. I certainly hope people do not forever point to crap like this and use it as justification to say racism is a super big deal. If you do, you will never ...EVER stop pointing.

[Keller]

A monkey is an idiot. The stimulus bill was idiotic. That's the point the cartoonist is trying to make IMO.


Probably best to stop using monkeys as dimwits for the next 4 to 8 years though.

I understood the monkey to be the government generally.

Not the President. The President signed the legislation. He didn't draft it.

[Tolwynn]

Frankly, even if all racism went away tomorrow, you'd still have people leaping at the chance to dredge up the past if they feel it serves them as well.

I was skimming Archaeology magazine yesterday, and in one article they were interviewing an amateur diver/archaelogist who was also black. The interviewer mentioned that there were few black divers or archaelogists, and asked what role could either play in the black community. The response? "Diving is not associated with African Americans. It might have to do with being forced here across water on slave ships."

Whatever the point of the rest of the article was, I didn't bother with it after that.

[ClydeR]

That's the chimp that ripped that woman's face off !

That incident brought new life to a bill (http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-80) that has been struggling in Congress for years. The bill passed by the House this week would prohibit the purchase or sale of "nonhuman primates," which leaves open all sorts of questions about other kinds of primates.

The vote was 247 Democrats and 76 Republicans in favor and 2 Democrats and 93 Republicans opposed.

I oppose the bill because it would be an unwarranted federal intrusion into state sovereignty (http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=89842). I sure hope the Senate Republicans filibuster it.

[Ravenstorm]

It was terrifically racist and highly offensive ... so what? Freedom of speech, anyone?

Very true. The cartoonist had every right to draw what he wanted that the paper was willing to publish. But hand in hand with freedom of speech comes the freedom to accept the consequences of that speech as other people exercise their own right to freedom of speech and the freedom to spend their money or not on products.

So long as there's no violence, he and the paper just need to live with the response to what quite understandably can be considered racist. And given his history of offensive cartoons, he's not getting the benefit of the doubt.

[Mtenda]

I suppose people will see this cartoon and think to themselves, "Racism is still very much alive and well in the United States/World/whatever"

The problem with this line of thinking is that racism will NEVER EVER EVEEER go away. There will ALWAYS be idiots, bigots, and those that pick physical attributes, religious beliefs, personal lifestyle choices, etc as a reason to take adverse actions against another. It will never go away.

With the information age being the way it is, 1 person can spread cartoons like the above to tens of millions. As so long as one person has access to the internet they can put out as much hate speech (which is a bit strong of a phrase to use to describe the cartoon) as they please. I certainly hope people do not forever point to crap like this and use it as justification to say racism is a super big deal. If you do, you will never ...EVER stop pointing.


I agree that it will likely never go away fully. But failing to acknowledge when it happens allows it to continue at the level it does and escalate beyond that. I certainly hope that people DO point to stuff like THIS forever because it's rediculous and I don't want my kids to see it and get the wrong impression. And since they are kids, they will. I did. The problem isn't people pointing out things that are clearly racism IMO. It's people pointing out things when it is not clear whether or not it is.

[Tsa`ah]

It's been said before, some people just look for reasons to be offended. Sharpton, Jackson, and a good many more (black, white, Asian .. yada yada) have made careers out of it.

The old guard is losing relevance and will try keep themselves in the public eye and give the illusion of relevance until the day they die.

I saw the cartoon in the light of "A monkey could do it" ... that's not to say that the cartoonist shouldn't have been a dumb ass about it either. I can see where it could (and is) offensive to others.

[Fallen]

I agree that it will likely never go away fully. But failing to acknowledge when it happens allows it to continue at the level it does and escalate beyond that. I certainly hope that people DO point to stuff like THIS forever because it's rediculous and I don't want my kids to see it and get the wrong impression. And since they are kids, they will. I did. The problem isn't people pointing out things that are clearly racism IMO. It's people pointing out things when it is not clear whether or not it is.

My issue with this line of thinking is eventually it will be a self-defeating behavior. Bringing the spotlight on the bit of Racism still left will only bring it more into the public eye. Also, nobody likes whiners. I wish I could think of a more PC way to phrase that last sentence, but meh. I imagine Al Sharpton has inspired more racism with this latest stunt than he will abolish by outting this cartoon.

Yes, this cartoon likely deserved some bad press, but I only saw that cartoon BECAUSE of the bad press. I would never have come into contact with it otherwise. My white friends weren't all Forwarding it like it's hot and guffawing at the black man. I think part of the reason racism will never fade into obscurity is because we will never allow it to be anything other than a big deal. Right or wrong, that's just how I see it.

DISCLAIMER: Racism is still a "big deal". Racism is still alive and well. Racism hasn't gone away. etc etc.

[Allereli]

I understood the monkey to be the government generally.

Pretty much. Besides, we have a great tradition in this country of comparing our leaders to apes.

http://static.playdo.com/1019/princess08heaven/tabimages/bush_monkey.jpg

[radamanthys]

http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh168/RUBENSWITZER/PorchMonkey4Life.jpg

[Tsa`ah]

It's ok .... we're taking it back.

[CrystalTears]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x2DxyAGzGxM

[Mabus]

I disagree that the cartoon is "racist" at all. I just do not see it.

My white friends weren't all Forwarding it like it's hot and guffawing at the black man.
Point "the black man" in the cartoon out for me?

If you (and this goes for everyone that sees one) see a "black man" in that cartoon you have issues.

[Fallen]

I disagree that the cartoon is "racist" at all. I just do not see it.

Point "the black man" in the cartoon out for me?

If you (and this goes for everyone that sees one) see a "black man" in that cartoon you have issues.

Bullshit. Anyone that wasn't capable of drawing that comparison without help is a fucking moron. One can say that it wasn't intended, but again, to claim that you never ever see the problem with it is the height of ignorance or falsehood. Take your pick.

[Mabus]

Bullshit. Anyone that wasn't capable of drawing that comparison without help is a fucking moron. One can say that it wasn't intended, but again, to claim that you never ever see the problem with it is the height of ignorance or falsehood. Take your pick.
That cartoon is acting as a Rorschach test on people with issues.

If your issue is lack of self esteem, or a persecution complex, or some lingering white-guilt over your own (or your friends' and family's) barely-hidden racism then you may be able to look at it and see "the black man".

I see political satire that says "That stimulus bill is so badly written it must have been written by a monkey".

But go ahead, tell me what I should see in the cartoon. Very informative.

Look at these ink blots. Tell me, what do you see?

[Fallen]

The black man? No. President Obama, the one who has been cramming this damned bill down our throat since day one? You bet ya.

I think I am beginning to see the flaw in my original arguments here. This IS a problem if people like the above refuse to acknowledge that the cartoon had racial undertones.

[Mabus]

The black man? No. President Obama, the one who has been cramming this damned bill down our throat since day one? You bet ya.
That's what the ink blots show you, eh?


I think I am beginning to see the flaw in my original arguments here. This IS a problem if people like the above refuse to acknowledge that the cartoon had racial undertones.
Someday a political satire cartoonist will be judged by his humor, rather then the fears and opportunism of idiots.

[Methais]

What a crock of shit. I never even saw it as a racist cartoon until the uproar started and was twisted into what they're portraying it as, and I'm the most racist person in the world.

It's already been said, but the stimulus bill is stupid and monkeys are stupid, therefore stimulus bill = written by a monkey, a monkey who made headlines days earlier for ripping someone's face off and getting shot to death by police.

Current events + political current events = political cartoon material.

I'm glad that Al proved my point from some thread a while back, where I said as soon as Obama fucks something up (stimulus bill) and is called out on it (monkey cartoon), someone (Sharpton) would play the race card, though I didn't think it would be this soon.

Somehow I don't think there would be an outcry if the monkey that ripped that woman's face off looked like this instead:
http://www.contrib.andrew.cmu.edu/~agrande/white-face-monkey-1.jpeg

Or if it had been a donkey instead of a monkey. Then what would they cry about? Being offended at someone for calling Obama a jackass instead of being as smart as a monkey?

It was ok to imply that Bush was a monkey for similar reasons (calling him an idiot), but it's automatically racist if you do the same to Obama because he's black.
http://www.freakingnews.com/pictures/1500/Bush-Monkey--1840.jpg

Anyone who seriously thinks the cartoon was made with racist intent is a fucking idiot.

Yes, you included.

Holy shit people are stupid.

[Fallen]

This is a case of the blind arguing with the paranoid I suppose. I can't see how any educated and wordly adult COULDN'T make the connection.

[Warriorbird]

Par for the course from Rupert Murdoch's companies. I'm sure they want the 'controversy.'

There's better stuff to be upset about.

[Parkbandit]

That cartoon is acting as a Rorschach test on people with issues.

If your issue is lack of self esteem, or a persecution complex, or some lingering white-guilt over your own (or your friends' and family's) barely-hidden racism then you may be able to look at it and see "the black man".

I see political satire that says "That stimulus bill is so badly written it must have been written by a monkey".

But go ahead, tell me what I should see in the cartoon. Very informative.

Look at these ink blots. Tell me, what do you see?

Bullshit.

That's like saying when you look at this symbol:

8=====)

If you see it as a cock, well then you must be gay.

You don't have to automatically be a racist or have white guilt if you have heard black people referred to as apes in your lifetime.

[Mtenda]

Bullshit.

That's like saying when you look at this symbol:

8=====)

If you see it as a cock, well then you must be gay.

You don't have to automatically be a racist or have white guilt if you have heard black people referred to as apes in your lifetime.

:yeahthat:

Certainly Sharpton has proven in the past that he is paranoid and takes things way too far. I still say it's not intended but irresponsible.

[Methais]

Bullshit.

That's like saying when you look at this symbol:

8=====)

If you see it as a cock, well then you must be gay.

I see that as a jewish man smiling.

[Fallen]

I see that as a jewish man smiling.

Bwhahahaha

See thread about racial slurs/stereotypes.

[Allereli]

You don't have to automatically be a racist or have white guilt if you have heard black people referred to as apes in your lifetime.

Correct, and having an ape in a political cartoon doesn't automatically mean it's Obama. Maybe if the ape were standing in front of a flag in a typical Obama pose, or if it were a raccoon instead. But since there was a very high profile story about a chimp at the same time, I think the reference was obviously not intended to be racial.

[DeV]

The Drunken Negro Cookie wasn't a big hit either, but the Obama monkey sock was kinda cute. :(

But seriously, when a cartoon needs to be explained...

I found the lack of humor to be the primary offense, but apparently political humor is serious business.

I see this debate centered around content versus context relying wholly on personal perception as opposed to any real, imagined, or obtuse underlying racism.

I think the black people who are offended by this are revisiting a time in our country when black people were often caricatured as ape-like, which helped foster the perception that they were less than human and would never be equal to a white person. This went on for hundreds of years in this country. It's tempting to ignore and downplay words or images that resemble bigotry for some, but in a time period where we've elected our first minority President we need to remain responsive and responsible to the impact these kinds of images can stir. With that said, I am a firm believer in free speech and strongly defend the artist's right to publish the cartoon.

As usual, I like to get differing sides of the spectrum so I visited a few of the myraid white power forums operating on the net and came across some dissenting opinions in support of the cartoon, for differing reasons. For example:

WELL DONE;-)
I love the fact that these disgusting apes go around beating their chests every time a simple fact is brought up. The more they cry and whine about there lower evalutionary place in nature the more they remove any preceived doubt in the minds of the general population.
This is sooo neat! I would like to remind any Nigroids out there in cyber land that no matter how hard you push your backwards culture on the human culture you will lose in the end, For good will always prevail...http://www.stormfront.org/forum/images/smilies/beerchug.gif

Here's another:
"Yes truth hurts the groid, their ugly and ape like, so they have an inferiority complex and get offended when they see pictures of, chimps, gorillas , orangutans, or their big wide noses and ape like selves in a mirror."

The spelling errors are quite ironic.


:bashing:

[DeV]

It was ok to imply that Bush was a monkey for similar reasons (calling him an idiot), but it's automatically racist if you do the same to Obama because he's black.
http://www.freakingnews.com/pictures/1500/Bush-Monkey--1840.jpg.Ethnocentrism, not racism is more the appropriate term. I'm thinking Sharpton didn't touch this one because the "creative team" was the same color as the target of the comparisons, plus we all know white people are Sharpton's sworn enemies and all.

http://www.bushorchimp.com/bios.html

[Mabus]

I see this debate centered around content versus context relying wholly on personal perception as opposed to any real, imagined, or obtuse underlying racism.
That is why I compared some of the responses to being like a Rorschach inkblot test.

I thought of the chimp attack (http://www.nydailynews.com/news/2009/02/17/2009-02-17_911_tape_captures_chimpanzee_owners_horr-2.html) that happened only days before the cartoon, in which police had to shoot the animal. It had ripped the face off of a woman. The "injury" the stimulus could do to the economy and the recent chimp attack worked together to form an iffy, and barely funny, political satire.

Others seem to see a whole race, or their president, in the drawing of a dead chimpanzee.

I feel the attitude of those that believe the pictured chimp was Obama to be the ones with racist issues. They are looking for racism where it did not exist.

Perhaps we should be more "sensitive" and purge from use any possible ideas, thoughts and publications that could be construed as racist by someone with issues.

As such we should ban any reference to Ritz crackers (and all saltines), snow and snowflakes (in any form) and change the name of the sound a car horn makes as well. For we would not want to offend some idiot that is looking to be offended in the soon-to-be-minority of whitee.

[Stanley Burrell]

Fucking fishbellies.

[DeV]

I feel the attitude of those that believe the pictured chimp was Obama to be the ones with racist issues. There are those who do not believe the cartoon is racist, yet they do believe the chimp is a fair representation of Obama. Even so I agree that the backlash is a direct result of racist issues.


Perhaps we should be more "sensitive" and purge from use any possible ideas, thoughts and publications that could be construed as racist by someone with issues.Really? Sensitivity to whatthefuckever doesn't require a purge of thoughts and ideas nor does it require opinions to be omitted simply because they don't coincide with yours or mine. And don't get me started on publications.

We live in a culture of extremes; extreme sensitivity to extreme insensitivity. It is all around us and the most obvious example can be found in politics, normally second only to religion. We need to reach middle ground before we begin discarding ideas of others, and not even both at the same time. Perhaps we should stick to making good use of common sense and leave the extremes to the extremists?

p.s. I'm totally cool with an all-out ban on snow. Ritz crackers... not so much.

[Mabus]

Really? Sensitivity to whatthefuckever doesn't require a purge of thoughts and ideas nor does it require opinions to be omitted simply because they don't coincide with yours or mine. And don't get me started on publications.
It was more of a sarcastic, rhetorical question. I was not suggesting it as a "fix".

:)

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

http://www.tshirthell.com/shirts/products/a1185/a1185_bm.gif

[thefarmer]

http://www.11alive.com/assetpool/images/0732193851_geico-030207.jpg

[Proxy]

http://www.nypost.com/delonas/2009/02/02182009.jpg

I LOL'd, thats freaking awesome!!!!

[Back]

The instant I saw this cartoon it was my feeling that it was not a comment on Obama at all. It is still very controversial for many reasons... casual violence against lawmakers by enforcers. State military coup and we all know how that ends.

[Androidpk]

That is why I compared some of the responses to being like a Rorschach inkblot test.

I thought of the chimp attack (http://www.nydailynews.com/news/2009/02/17/2009-02-17_911_tape_captures_chimpanzee_owners_horr-2.html) that happened only days before the cartoon, in which police had to shoot the animal. It had ripped the face off of a woman. The "injury" the stimulus could do to the economy and the recent chimp attack worked together to form an iffy, and barely funny, political satire.

Others seem to see a whole race, or their president, in the drawing of a dead chimpanzee.



That is pretty much exactly what I thought when I saw the cartoon the day it came out, and thought nothing else of it. People like Sharpton are a little too extreme in their cause, actively trying to root out racism where it does not exist. Even though I don't think the apology was absolutely necessary, Sharpton should have accepted it and moved on. Kind of reminds me when Don Imus called those girls nappy headed hos, he apologized, the girls forgave him, and Sharpton still kept screaming for blood. People like Sharpton end up causing more harm then good.

[Back]

That is pretty much exactly what I thought when I saw the cartoon the day it came out, and thought nothing else of it. People like Sharpton are a little too extreme in their cause, actively trying to root out racism where it does not exist. Even though I don't think the apology was absolutely necessary, Sharpton should have accepted it and moved on. Kind of reminds me when Don Imus called those girls nappy headed hos, he apologized, the girls forgave him, and Sharpton still kept screaming for blood. People like Sharpton end up causing more harm then good.

Eh, I thought the Imus thing was a little over the top. These are two different things though.

[Androidpk]

Definately over the top, and definately different from this situation. My point was just both sides had met and discussed what happened, the girls accepted his apology, and Sharpton stuck his nose in and tried to make to make it about him.

[Back]

Its interesting to note about these two different situations is that Imus’ employer fired him and Murdoch did not fire the cartoonist and took the blame.

[DeV]

It was more of a sarcastic, rhetorical question. I was not suggesting it as a "fix".

:)It was more so to highlight the opinion that followed. I omitted italics as well. :)

[Mabus]

the cartoonist and took the blame.
What blame did the cartoonist take?

He said the cartoon had nothing to do with Obama.

[Back]

Reading comprehension FTL.

[Mabus]

Reading comprehension FTL.

Statement by RUPERT MURDOCH

As the Chairman of the New York Post, I am ultimately responsible for what is printed in its pages. The buck stops with me.

Last week, we made a mistake. We ran a cartoon that offended many people. Today I want to personally apologize to any reader who felt offended, and even insulted.

Over the past couple of days, I have spoken to a number of people and I now better understand the hurt this cartoon has caused. At the same time, I have had conversations with Post editors about the situation and I can assure you - without a doubt - that the only intent of that cartoon was to mock a badly written piece of legislation. It was not meant to be racist, but unfortunately, it was interpreted by many as such.

We all hold the readers of the New York Post in high regard and I promise you that we will seek to be more attuned to the sensitivities of our community.
I do not see any mention of the person that actually drew the cartoon, other then the "we" pronoun. I do see that the "cartoon was to mock a badly written piece of legislation", not an admittance that it was meant to be racist.

I still believe Imus was wronged, but in the hypersensitive world we live in let's just hang every comedian or satirist that makes an off-color statement dealing with race (or even perceived as dealing with race).

Let's start with the Asian ones making fun of Mexicans until we work our way through them all. We have to start making the world a better placee somewhere.

I need sleep, or more coffee.

[Tisket]

I thought he was talking about his own reading comprehension.

[Mabus]

I thought he was talking about his own reading comprehension.
I misread his post, and thought it said something that it did not. For that, I apologize, Back.

But it did allow me to post the Murdoch statement, which makes this better coverage of this incident then on most TV stations.

(:coffee:And this fresh pot of coffee will keep me coding all night.)

[Daniel]

I think I am beginning to see the flaw in my original arguments here. This IS a problem if people like the above refuse to acknowledge that the cartoon had racial undertones.

Glad you came around.

It's hilarious that I get painted some sort of African American Nazi by some people on these boards because I simply point out that racism exists in America.

Contrary to popular belief, there is a way to acknowledge racism without necessarily condemning another race and\or all people associated with it, while not being a whiner in the process.

[Parkbandit]

Glad you came around.

It's hilarious that I get painted some sort of African American Nazi by some people on these boards because I simply point out that racism exists in America.

Contrary to popular belief, there is a way to acknowledge racism without necessarily condemning another race and\or all people associated with it, while not being a whiner in the process.

There hasn't been a single sane poster that ever stated that racism doesn't exist in this country or in any other country on this planet. Thank you Captain Obvious for pointing it out for us. Also, you generally come across as a whiner in the process of debating the levels of racism, so if you could work on that.. I know I would appreciate it.

Today, you should tackle the process where this big ball of fire flies across the sky! There are many people on this board that simply do not understand it and would love for you to set the record straight.

[TheRunt]

What is Sharpton's goal if not to seek an apology? (he rejected it, apparently) It just feels like he is pointing out the obvious.

Its to get him to kiss J Jackson's ass of course.

http://www.milkandcookies.com/link/58827/detail/
About 4-4:30 in.


And actually when I saw the cartoon I didn't take it as racist, I took it as the government being a bunch of monkeys(more interested in throwing shit and jacking off than being intelligent). I can see how it could be viewed in a racist manor but that is not how I viewed it. And the cartoon said specifically "write" how much of the bill did Obama write? If they would of said signed I could see it.


The Drunken Negro Cookie wasn't a big hit either, but the Obama monkey sock was kinda cute. :(

I prefered the Obama chia pet myself :tumble: although the puppet was cute. And just to be fair they were only Obama head cookies for one day in honor of the inauguration they were drunken negro heads the rest of the time.


So long as there's no violence, he and the paper just need to live with the response to what quite understandably can be considered racist.

Violence by who? If riots were started because of it which I doubt they would have to prove that his intent was to incite a riot. Which I highly doubt was the case even if he meant it in a racist manner.

[Jace Solo]

Did anyone think that maybe it has more to do with "Monkey see, monkey do?" I can think of a lot of Dems that do as their told or as they see the others around them do. If I remember correctly, the bill was drafted, almost solely, by Pelosi at the specific request of Obama. Ya, but he said it wasn't about Pelosi, he also said it wasn't about Obama. So pick what you believe, or decided to believe that he really did make it about the package. I'm a firm believer in giving people the benefit of the doubt and I'm pretty sure in court it would be speculating what was in his head...which is impermissible.

[TheRunt]

Did anyone think that maybe it has more to do with "Monkey see, monkey do?"

Racist. How dare you use the evil derogatory slur monkey when the greatest man that ever lived the savior of the entire human race is in office?

[Warriorbird]

I think Murdoch wanted to boost circulation. Newspaper is dying media.

[Methais]

I'm wondering why PETA hasn't gotten in on this too, saying the cartoon is trying to rally people up to go out and shoot monkeys because they're good for nothing but ripping faces off.

[Mabus]

I'm wondering why PETA hasn't gotten in on this too, saying the cartoon is trying to rally people up to go out and shoot monkeys because they're good for nothing but ripping faces off.
They would, but they are so weak from their winter vegetable diet.
;)

[Methais]

Glad you came around.

It's hilarious that I get painted some sort of African American Nazi by some people on these boards because I simply point out that racism exists in America.

Contrary to popular belief, there is a way to acknowledge racism without necessarily condemning another race and\or all people associated with it, while not being a whiner in the process.

I don't think you're some sort of African American Nazi.

But that's partially because you're from the United States and not Africa, therefore making you American, not African American.

[Methais]

Eh, I thought the Imus thing was a little over the top. These are two different things though.

http://www.bestweekever.tv/bwe/images/2007/05/nappyDVD1.jpg

[Mtenda]

I don't think you're some sort of African American Nazi.

But that's partially because you're from the United States and not Africa, therefore making you American, not African American.

http://pageslap.files.wordpress.com/2008/10/obama_poster_soup_nazi.gif

[Back]

http://www.bestweekever.tv/bwe/images/2007/05/nappyDVD1.jpg

Exactly. Imus did not denigrate prostitutes. He denigrated the best and finest of American athletes.

[Methais]

http://pageslap.files.wordpress.com/2008/10/obama_poster_soup_nazi.gif

http://winniecooper.net/flores/pics/soup.jpg


Exactly. Imus did not denigrate prostitutes. He denigrated the best and finest of American athletes.

So does it also make me racist if I call this one a nappy headed ho too even though she's Asian?

http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j286/ExpatJane/smileys/July%202007/bombhead_monsters_hair_works_084025.jpg

[Androidpk]

Only if bukakke is not involved.

[Wesley]

She's asian. Bukakke is ALWAYS involved. Where's Stretch? He'll back me up.