Bullshit! The economy is not dying! Nor is it racist! It is merely political for heavens sake!
Printable View
Bullshit! The economy is not dying! Nor is it racist! It is merely political for heavens sake!
"no sober person could seriously believe that anyone would liken the president or for that matter any black to a chimp. Unfortunately, a lot still do - including a lot of GOP members, they even released the album containing such "hits" as Obama the 'Magic Negro', thus this cartoon is just a natural continuation. "
This is apocryphal, without support! Further the GOP released no such album or song!
Quote:
Originally Posted by DuncanONeil
And my guess is the longer the GOP does stuff like this, the longer it will take them to regain power in either Congress or the White House
And Micheal Steele, the new RNC National Chairmen siad just last week, that the GOP needs to Change or Adjust it's Platform to be more Current and updated or the GOP will continue to loose elections
And how "ironic" is it, and NO slight is meant bythis that he is chosen after Obama is Inuagrated, and Stelle happens to be Black, first time ever for the RNC just likw the forst time eer for Presdient
To many old time GOPers stil in office who will neevr change their stand on issues
Blinks?? what on earth does the GOP have to do with this cartoon? Or the video mentioned earlier for that matter?Quote:
Originally Posted by mkemse
He's referring to Chip Saltzman while he was a candidate for RNC chairmanship distributing a CD to other Republicans as a Christmas gift with the song "Barack the Magic Negro" on it.Quote:
Originally Posted by denuseri
Cite: http://www.wikio.com/video/722831
I believe the stimulus bill was mostly written by Nancy Pekosi as Speaker of the House. So perhaps this cartoon was sexist and in bad taste. My question is how can President Obama tell Governors to spend the money wisely and not wastefully when the Congressional Buget Office considers it to be poor bill.
As I said, internet bullies and sophomoric humor sites made the Bush = chimp pictures but to the best of my ability to locate through Google or archive searches, never by any main stream media.Quote:
Originally Posted by DuncanONeil
The political cartoon that the Post published was in my opinion a very deliberate attempt to stir up the exact thing we're seeing here, lots and lots of discussion. The Post needs exposure very badly being the much smaller NY paper during a very difficult time for newspapers in general to stay afloat.
Some epole like the bill others don'tQuote:
Originally Posted by moosehunter
They had s Poll On Monday night and only 56% of those Polled liked the Bill, aftr hisspeach last night the repolled thismoring and the plans poll went up to an 85% approval base on what peole said ws they now know what is going to happen woth the money, thingsare much clearer
The reality is not everyone wil ike it, but in anything in life you will never ever please everyone all the time
And one of the 3 Republicans who supported the Bill said "No I do ont like it, but SOMETHING, ANYTHING right now is better then NOTHING at all
The bill was written by staffers based on a compromise between the Senate and House versions.Quote:
Originally Posted by moosehunter
The CBO did not say it was a bad bill. They said that the stimulus bill designed to have short -term impact would indeed have short-term impact in boosting the economy. What has been twisted by some commentators and politicians to try and make this a negative was a single sentence in the letter to Judd Gregg that said that by 2019 the impact of the additional debt would be to reduce the baseline expected GPD to be reduced by .1% to .3%. According to the Heritage Foundation (a very conservative think tank) based on CBO estimate s the worst case would be that by 2019, GPD would be growing at 2.2% annually instead of the expected 2.5%.
If the Obama administration makes good on even part of their budgetary promises these numbers will change substantially as there would not be the amount of debt calculated by the CBO. Therefore that debt would not squeeze out private investment thereby positively changing the impact on GDP in the out years.
Cite: http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/96xx/doc9619/Gregg.pdf
Someone mentioned earlier in THIS thread both the videos that the GOP ran on a site, my reply wasto that comment madeQuote:
Originally Posted by denuseri
no sober person could seriously believe that anyone would liken the president or for that matter any black to a chimp. Unfortunately, a lot still do - including a lot of GOP members, they even released the album containing such "hits" as Obama the 'Magic Negro', thus this cartoon is just a natural continuation. "Quote:
Originally Posted by denuseri
This is apocryphal, without support! Further the GOP released no such album or song!
my post was a rply to this post above by DuncanOneil if you look up highier on this thread, thi page, i replied to his cmments it is 5-6 posts up from ths ne toward the top or midleo f this page
I have read the whole thread mkemse thanks, I just didnt realize anyone from the gop itself had instigated such a thing in the name of the party or any other offical capacity, and I obviously found the idea that someone would to be kinda silly, it sounded more to me like somthing Rush or one of his pundents would have started.
That being said based on the context of the preceding posts Duncan was answering a post from another member I was asking for more inromation before making my own opinion.
After further reaserch I see the video in question “Barack the Magic Negro” by conservative satirist Paul Shanklin who created it was popularized to some extent by Rush and Saltsman later distributed it to his friends as a Christmass Greeting of all things and the GOP itself as a whole actually had no part in it and shouldnt be villified as such.
Now as for Shanklin, Rush and Saltsman... I only can say shame on all three of them for propogating such racist bull%$#@. They are no better than the people at the Post. But hey they are part of the same media beast that promotes discontent and divsion as a means of lining thier own pockets to the expense of actually following any sense of journalist virtue ironic only if such a thing ever actually existed in any way other than name only.
Your ignorance of the slur does not mean it hasn't been VERY prevalent. And the "Barack the Magic Negro" incident is NOT apocryphal, it happened. And it cited in this very thread.Quote:
Originally Posted by DuncanONeil
And a simple google search found this as the first listing. I could cite more if you would like.
http://www.racialslurs.com/search?q=monkeys&sort=slur
And as a follow-on. The racist overtones of the cartoon are disturbing enough, but not a one of the people who have supported this cartoon, talked about the violence it incites.
It condones, in a way, the assassination of political figures.
The cartoon is and was and always will be disgusting.
OK all i was doing was replyin to his thread, which was question you osted of me in trhis thread thatsss allQuote:
Originally Posted by denuseri
Again, I don't see it! Except for the fact that it references the actual occurrence of a chimp having to be shot to protect a human, I just can't see how this promotes violence or the assassination of anyone! Perhaps it says more about the state of mind of those readers who do see such things than about the cartoonist himself. Or perhaps it says more about my state of mind that I don't see it, until it's thrust in my face by the strident voices of those who are more interested in getting their faces on the news than in actually instigating any meaningful dialog. (Not directed at those here, btw. So far all the statements I've read here seem well reasoned and honest. I'm referring more to the likes of Rev. Al Sharpton, and his ilk.)Quote:
Originally Posted by Belgarold
I'm reminded of a little piece written by Isaac Asimov as an introduction to one of his stories. He was constantly being shown all kinds of treatises on his works and what he was trying to say and the hidden meanings in his works. He said, flat out, that there were no hidden meanings, no secret messages, no grand schemes. He was simply writing stories.
Barring any evidence to the contrary, I'm inclined to assume the same of the cartoonist: he wasn't inciting assassinations, or promoting violence. He was simply drawing a cartoon, drawing attention to two unrelated news topics. Reading anything else into it is simply guesswork.
I agree it simpy was not neededQuote:
Originally Posted by Belgarold
Thorne,
I know you are being honest about not seeing it, your posts have always been respectful disagreement and not inflammatory. And I know sometimes my posts can seem strident. I don't intend that.
Two points: The getting their face in the news, opportunistic posturing cuts both ways. Limbaugh, O'Reilly and the Fox crew, as well as the Editor of the Post, have downplayed this issue and inflated others to ridiculous status.
And second, there are those of us that DO see it and are disturbed by the implications. ANd my worry are the nutjobs out there. For example, the madman that shot up the Unitarian church to kill Liberal Leaders.
If we see it there is some nutjob out there that will see it, and my fear is him acting upon it. And I think if I say or do something that can be misconstrued, whether I mean it or not. I WILL feel obligated to apologize for that. I think a LOT of racism and violence is subconscious these days.
Just my thought on the issue. I truly believe there are people out there waiting for something to justify their insanity to the point of acting on it. And Limbaugh, The Post and any of Murdoch's holdings, have straddled the line in inciting these dangerous folk.
I understand that, and my comment about "strident" voices was not aimed at anyone here at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by Belgarold
I agree with you completely, here. The strident conservatives are no less guilty of this than strident liberals. Both sides are pulling at the same rope in a never ending tug of war, and they all wind up with mud on their faces.Quote:
Two points: The getting their face in the news, opportunistic posturing cuts both ways. Limbaugh, O'Reilly and the Fox crew, as well as the Editor of the Post, have downplayed this issue and inflated others to ridiculous status.
I understand your concerns, and the concerns of others here. I think one of my failings is that I don't always see the seamier sides of these issues. I always want to believe that most people tend to think clearly and logically, not letting themselves be swayed by inane rhetoric. Naive, as I've noted before.Quote:
And second, there are those of us that DO see it and are disturbed by the implications. ANd my worry are the nutjobs out there. For example, the madman that shot up the Unitarian church to kill Liberal Leaders.
If we see it there is some nutjob out there that will see it, and my fear is him acting upon it. And I think if I say or do something that can be misconstrued, whether I mean it or not. I WILL feel obligated to apologize for that. I think a LOT of racism and violence is subconscious these days.
That's what they do. How they make their livings. The really sad thing is that there are, apparently, so many who are willing to let these people do their thinking for them. I can never understand how someone could be proud to be called a "dittohead!"Quote:
Just my thought on the issue. I truly believe there are people out there waiting for something to justify their insanity to the point of acting on it. And Limbaugh, The Post and any of Murdoch's holdings, have straddled the line in inciting these dangerous folk.
Just wanted to say Thorne, sorry for the confusion. I was just recognizing my own ability to get a little strident now and then, not to imply that I felt that you were directing your comments at me. And I agree with all you said. I would like to think that most people are thinking rationally too, but fear it is not always the case.
I apreciate your comments :-)
Does stuff like what? Gop change stand on issues? You mean like the Democrats, ahem, "change" their position?Quote:
Originally Posted by mkemse
Polls on this are all over the place from 90% against to 60% in favor. With some numbers in between of 68% against and 37% and 51% in favor. The bigger piece of information is what are the questions asked. Meaning are the people in favor of "a stimulus" or in favor of the reckless manner in which this has been crafted with all its give aways?
The very same thing can be said of all political cartoons!Quote:
Originally Posted by mkemse
Your comments regarding "nut jobs" is more of the kind of thing that decides that people are not responsible for their own actions. People see what they want to see in any image, or comment. The true facts is that people see in comments and images their own personal understanding of the world rather than that actually presented.Quote:
Originally Posted by Belgarold
That's what they do. How they make their livings. The really sad thing is that there are, apparently, so many who are willing to let these people do their thinking for them. I can never understand how someone could be proud to be called a "dittohead!"[/QUOTE]
If that is truely the case how is that more violent action comes from the left side of the spectrum than the right?
Who said anything about violent action? I was merely talking about those individuals who seem content to let so-called celebrities (many of whom have criminal records of one sort or another) determine what is right for them. That goes for political topics as well as fashion statements.Quote:
Originally Posted by DuncanONeil
If that is truely the case how is that more violent action comes from the left side of the spectrum than the right?[/QUOTE]Quote:
Originally Posted by DuncanONeil
And where do you get the information that more violent action comes from the left than the right. Could you please justify your opinions with something like a fact or something.
You seem to wish to be inflammatory and making unjustifiable accusations. We are trying to have a civil discussion here.
Ok Thorne! Did not come across that way.
And where do you get the information that more violent action comes from the left than the right. Could you please justify your opinions with something like a fact or something.Quote:
Originally Posted by Belgarold
You seem to wish to be inflammatory and making unjustifiable accusations. We are trying to have a civil discussion here.[/QUOTE]
First of all the quote attributed to me is not something I would ever say. I would never use the term "dittohead"
As for violent action from the left, that is a matter of observation.
Why should I bother further to provide you and supportive data when you refuse to do the very same thing. Also when data is provided you simply pretend it is either Whole Cloth or does not exist. Perhaps I should then accuse you of resorting to calling names.
It has become apparent that you are not worth my time nor effort. It appears that you have no inclination to consider anything that does not fit into your preconceived world view.
LOL. Yep, I didn't think you had any support for your position. And I HAVE supported my statements. I just did not support them with evidence that YOU like, so you son't seem to see it. Please stop trying to incite.Quote:
Originally Posted by DuncanONeil
I get that you don;t agree with me, but unsubstantiated quotes and incitements do not change my opinion. THorne and the others in this thread are having a fairly civil debate. I am going to try to say this respectfully. You do not seem capable of doing so. Instead of providing support for what amount to opinions you turn around and want to "take your ball and go home." That is fine. But do NOT suppose that makes you right. You should read your last paragraph and apply it to yourself. You have a view that you cannot substantiate and I don't agree with you. BUt you take that as a personal affront.
I don't agree with Thorne on everything. But I respect him and will listen to him and we may not change each other's opinions but we will still, hopefully, respect each other.
AND the quote is NOT yours. It was from Thorne, and I disrespected him by attributing it to you, it was an editing error. I apologize to Thorne and you.
Just for fun let's take the U.S. over the last 50 years.Quote:
Originally Posted by DuncanONeil
Here's a few that I recall.
Right-Wing Extremist Violence:
Murder of Emmit Till
Attack on peaceful lunch counter sit-ins in NC, GA, MS.
Murder of Medgar Evers
Fire bombing of black churches in MS, AL, GA by KKK
Attacks on "Freedom Riders" (volunteers registering blacks to vote in the south.
Birmingham, Ala., Commissioner of Public Safety Eugene "Bull" Connor uses fire hoses and police dogs on peaceful black demonstrators.
Murder of Four young girls (Denise McNair, Cynthia Wesley, Carole Robertson, and Addie Mae Collins) attending Sunday school.
James E. Chaney, 21; Andrew Goodman, 21; and Michael Schwerner, 24, had been working to register black voters in Mississippi and were murdered.
Selma, AL - Fifty non-violent marchers are hospitalized after police use tear gas, whips, and clubs against them.
Martin Luther King is murdered.
In the U.S., violence directed toward abortion providers has killed at least 7 people, including 3 doctors, 2 clinic employees, a security guard, and a clinic escort.
According to statistics gathered by the National Abortion Federation (NAF), an organization of abortion providers, since 1977 there have been 17 attempted murders, 383 death threats, 153 incidents of assault or battery, and 3 kidnappings committed against abortion providers.
Bombing of Murrah Federal building claimed 168 lives and left over 800 people injured.
Cites:
http://www.factmonster.com/spot/civi...timeline1.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-abortion_violence
http://www2.indystar.com/library/fac...ombing/ok.html
Thanks Dr. BuzzCzar. You embarrass me for my laziness in not finding these. Great work. Thank you for your post.
And even though Bush was destroying this country I heard of no one proposing violence. But during the campaign, assassination and violence was implied against Obama a few times. And even more recently Alan Keyes has said, "Something must be done about Obama." Implying something violent. "Joe the Plumber" was implying proposing using the military against Congressmen and women, maybe it was in jest. But that stuff 'ain't funny.'
Now the good Dr's post was well-cited. But this is like your, uh, support. observation. Who have you seen on the left proposing violence? I truly would like to know.
"LOL. Yep, I didn't think you had any support for your position."
Bull hockey. I gave you facts and figures and you just said they were fake. Didn't show they were fake, just said they were. Anytime I gave you anything you did not like you just pretended it did not exist. You claim you support your position but all you have is sound bites. The inability to engage in a reasoned debate is why you have been cut off not the inability on one of us to engage!
Ok then you want to accept radical personages that have attacked either specific individuals or entities and ascribe all of that to the entire conservative spectrum?
There are over the top radicals in every grouping. Timothy McVeigh does not speak for me as I presume Greenpeace trying to sink a ship at sea does not speak for you. This I hold true in all cases; Hamas, hezbollah, and al Queada do not speak for the Arab that owns a business here in my town.
That being said many actions taken by the "radical" right, "radical" left, "radical" environmentalist, and "radical" Islamists are wrong actions.
Okay a few things:Quote:
Originally Posted by DuncanONeil
When have I been 'cut off'?
Please show me your posts that showed facts and figures, if I missed them I would like to see them and I will apologize.
And where have I ignored these facts. Again, if I have done as you said, I will apologize.
Now I will admit Dr. BuzzCzar was VERY complete in his citations and I have, admittedly been lazier and just noted a few incidents, but they are NOT just 'sound bites.' And I truthfully cannot see any facts, any citations to support your views. I would love to see them, if you have.
Now I am going to try not to get into a baseless argument with you (I think I am already too deep into that area now) but I AM having a reasoned argument with others.
Please explain your accusations.
Your original point was that there was more violence from the left side of the political spectrum than from the right. You asked for specifics and proof. I gave you some actions that can be charged to right wing extremists. Since you seemed sure of your point I was expecting a similar list of violence perpetuated by left-wing extremists. To me any violent action by either side would be wrong and has no place in political efforts. I was simply giving you what you asked for as I don't agree with your premise regarding violent acts. In my admittedly less than humble opinion you're wrong and I think the facts back me up.Quote:
Originally Posted by DuncanONeil
I left out what was done to union organizers and members, AIM (native Americans), The Orangeburg Massacre, Kent State, etc etc. The list is much longer once you start thinking about it. There's been violence from the left as well, although I believe it to be much less than the reactionary right has perpetrated.Quote:
Originally Posted by Belgarold
Thank you.
It appears that the facts I had in mind are largely in another thread but these were included in this one.
" DuncanONeil
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 65
Thanks: 3
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Polls on this are all over the place from 90% against to 60% in favor. With some numbers in between of 68% against and 37% and 51% in favor. The bigger piece of information is what are the questions asked. Meaning are the people in favor of "a stimulus" or in favor of the reckless manner in which this has been crafted with all its give aways? "
Greenpeace actions at sea!