Tuesday, June 16, 2009
Acting White: Gorilla Comment Aimed At Michelle Obama
I missed the war of words, this past weekend, over the South Carolina Republican Rusty DePass comment that an escaped gorilla was, "...one of Michelle's ancestors -- probably harmless." My only retort is to show my version of our elegant and beautiful first lady. And good old Rusty can KMA!
Here is the CNN story (below), FYI.
James C. Collier
READ MOST RECENT POSTS AT ACTING WHITE...
Technorati Tags: Acting White: Gorilla Comment Aimed At Michelle Obama, Rusty DePass, South Carolina, Facebook, Racist Joke, Acting White
Here is the CNN story (below), FYI.
James C. Collier
READ MOST RECENT POSTS AT ACTING WHITE...
Technorati Tags: Acting White: Gorilla Comment Aimed At Michelle Obama, Rusty DePass, South Carolina, Facebook, Racist Joke, Acting White
Posted by James C. Collier at Tuesday, June 16, 2009
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
Racial hypersensitivity at its finest. Reminds me of Macon D's self-righteous holier-than-thou denunciation of David Carradine as a "yellowface" exploitation artist.
Personally, I thought it was a bit racist of Obama to say that McCain's campaign meetings were a "good-old-boys club". But I didn't get upset about it. Yes, the "good-old-boys" stereotype is a bunch of old white men. McCain is an old white man. Plenty of people laughed. If some of them have the misguided notion that all old white guys are members of the Skull&Bones, so be it. That's not Obama's fault.
But if some nobody, loosely affiliated with the Republican party, makes a racially tinged joke about an Obama, suddenly that's front-page news. I can understand the argument that the First Lady should be off limits, but she has consistently put herself out there and the media is trumpeting her as the second coming of Jackie Kennedy. She's fair game.
I don't think the joke is funny. But there's no need to crucify this guy and his political "family" to the seventh generation for a joke just because some "protected" groups don't find it funny. That is intolerance.
She is off-limits as far as I am concerned. She is exempt from racist / sexist jokes, extremely personal criticism, and the like.
When there are other problems with her, which is of a political nature, I am sure the people around her are astute enough to have that conversation. As she has shown, the First Lady is sharp enough to change and adapt to those "political" challenges.
Some folks want to pretend that they do not understand why disrespecting this black woman is off the table. That is their problem.
If political termination is the price, so be it.
@ Anon - How exactly is calling someone a part of the "good old boys club" racist? Implying that a human being is a monkey is insensitive at best and racist at worse. And when one likens the First Lady of the United States to an ape, that's just inappropriate and unacceptable. This would have been an impropriate comment even if the First Lady hadn't been black, but given the history of comparing black folks to monkeys, this is far from racial hypersensitivity.
And from what I've read of the guy who made the "joke" he wasn't "loosely affiliated" with the Republican Party, but a well known local Republican activist. I agree that the entire party shouldn't be castigated because of one racist remark by one moronic Republican, but the Republican Party certainly hasn't done a very good job of either reaching out to or making minorities feel welcome within the Party. And incidents like this, especially since there was no remark from the Republican leadership about it, certainly don't help.
This man is guilty of be ungentlemanly and should be ashamed of himself.
Perhaps reviving the noble art of dueling would cause some tongues to pause before wagging.
"the Republican Party certainly hasn't done a very good job of either reaching out to or making minorities feel welcome within the Party"
You mean they haven't pandered as much as the Democrats? They haven't done enough to bribe minority voters with entitlement programs and special privileges?
Well, I agree. And I think they should just stop trying. This whole Michael Steele fiasco shows how far gone they are. No matter how much the Republicans pander, the Democrats will pander more. And the Republicans will continue to alienate their base by doing so.
By the way, I have heard infinitely worse things said about the Bushes, both of them, by much more prominent people. So don't give me this "respect" nonsense.
"You mean they haven't pandered as much as the Democrats? They haven't done enough to bribe minority voters with entitlement programs and special privileges?"
No, I meant exactly what I said: The Republican Party does a poor job of appealing to minorities in general and the black community in particular.
All politics is about pandering. Democrats, Republicans, Independents, Greens Libertarians, they all pander. All politicians and political parties attempt to convince their constituency that they (and by extension their party) can offer a valuable service to the voters and has the voters best interest at heart.
I'm from the South originally and I've been saying for years that giving the socially conservative nature of the black community in the South, the Republican Party should be able to capture more of the Southern Black vote. But they haven't. Why? It goes way beyond the "entitlement programs" you mentioned.
Since the end of the Civil War, the black community in the South tended to vote Republican. But that all changed due to a variety of factors, including the Dixiecrats (Southern, conservative Democrats) breaking off from the Democratic Party and eventually being absorbed (along with some of their more racist elements) into the Republican Party.
Why would the black community vote for a party that many still view as racist? Going one step further, why would they vote for a party that's viewed as not giving a crap about any of the issues or problems that concern the black community? And no, I'm not only talking of "entitlement programs", many of which were passed to address the historical effects of systematic discrimination of both minorities and women in the US...in other words, those "entitlement programs" weren't just aimed at the black community.
I actually don't think all Republicans are racists. Heck I don't even think the majority of Republicans are racist. But I do think the Republicans need to find a way to expand beyond their base and incorporate more minorities (many of whom are actually quite conservative) and moderates into their party. I firmly believe that elections are not won by the extreme, but by the middle. Moderate matter.
And I notice you didn't answer my original question: how exactly is the term "good old boys clubs" racist? I'm not being facetious when I ask this. I'm genuinely curious about the answer.
P.S. I don't think I heard either of the Bushes referred to in a manner that hearkened back to racial stereotypes. But to be fair, I also haven't read every news piece written on the Bushes so I could be wrong on this one.
And stuff like this is why so many folks in the black community neither trust nor vote for the Republican Party:
"And I notice you didn't answer my original question: how exactly is the term "good old boys clubs" racist? I'm not being facetious when I ask this. I'm genuinely curious about the answer."
I didn't answer it again because I answered it in my original post. The "good old boys club" is a stereotype of old white men. Calling McCain's campaign a "good old boys club" was appealing to this racist, sexist, ageist stereotype. Of course, the reason it's so impossible for you to comprehend this is because you're so well conditioned to believe that it's impossible to be racist against a white or sexist against a man.
You give absolutely no evidence that "Republicans are racist". Instead you say "people think Republicans are racist". What can the Republicans do when people are so willing to believe lies? Robert Byrd, an extremely prominent Democrat Senator, used to be in the KKK. But, somehow, it is the Republicans who are racist.
Instead you use the illusory spectre of racism to justify the unfailing black allegiance to the Democrats, when any objective person with a functioning brain can see that blacks vote Democrat because of welfare, affirmative action, hate speech, and other special entitlement and privilege programs. How exactly could Republicans appeal to this mentality without becoming a carbon copy or a more extreme version of the Democrats?
I've heard this BS argument so many times, often from so-called "Republican strategists": Republicans need to "reach out" to minorities. But nobody ever says how. Republicans have always offered a platform of liberty, traditional values, and personal responsibility that should appeal to everybody. But the Democrats have trumped that by saying "Vote for me, and I'll give you this". Is there another way, aside from offering more racial spoils than the Democrats, that Republicans can "reach out"? Or are the blacks who constantly demand "outreach" just speaking in code?
#1. I didn't say Republicans are racist. Referring back to my comment, I said I personally don't believe most Republicans are racist, but they're viewed as racist by many within the black community. That's a big part of their problem when reaching out to minorities, the widely held view in the black community that they're racist. And I never said Democrats aren't racist too. People are individuals after all. Any group, including political parties, are going to have members who are racist. But the Republicans especially seem to have problems with this label. Perhaps addressing racist statements coming from members of the party and calling said members on the carpet would help defuse the idea of Republicans as racist. I'm not a political strategist, so it's not my job to figure out how to address that problem.
#2. Please don't make assumptions about why blacks vote Democratic. That's just as bad as me making assumptions about whites who vote Republican (I don't by the way). Like I said before, Blacks in the South tend to be pretty conservative on social issues (i.e. support "traditional values"), so if the Republican party can get past the perception of them being racist, there is an appeal there for the black community.
#3. The welfare/entitlement programs you speak off are not the only reason blacks vote Democrat. Just like other racial groups, the black community is very diverse with various socio-economic statuses within the group. In my opinion, the welfare/entitlement programs you speak of are not terribly important for the middle class/upper middle class/high income segments of the black community. Unemployment, taxes, health care,cost of living and the quality of living, factors that are just as important to non-blacks, figure in much more prominently.
#4. I said the Republicans need to reach out to minorities, which doesn't only include the black community. Look at the Hispanic community in the 2000 elections. They tended to vote Republican, in part because as a demographic they tend to be socially conservative. The Republicans were able to appeal to a minority community based on the issues that were important to that community.
America is not a white nation. It's always been, and will continue to be, a very racially mixed nation. So if the Republicans can't shake the perception that they're racist and only appeal to the white population (again, neither of which I believe) then there's going to be problems for them in the future.
I love how the Anonymous, who is clearly not black, just knows he has black voters' motivations figured out, and is so convinced of this that he is willing to tell blacks that they are wrong about their own peoples psychology. Only over the internet I'm sure, with not even a blog link of his own.
Since you have consistently ignored everything I wrote, I'll just respond to a few select points. You did speak a few truths, but you also parroted a lot of entirely unfounded propaganda.
"Please don't make assumptions about why blacks vote Democratic."
Right. Blacks think deep and hard about every political decision, and after intense contemplation they always happen to decide that Democrats are the best alternative for the whole country.
I'll be honest here, even if you won't. Most voters do not give a great deal of thought to who they will vote for. At best, they'll vote with their gut and justify their decision after the fact. Blacks are consistently 90% Democrat. As you say, most Blacks are more socially conservative than the Democrats. So why do they vote nearly uniformly Democrat? Clearly, social issues are not the concern. Clearly, "racism" is not the concern, considering Robert Byrd's KKK membership and Joe Biden's consistently racist comments. But HOW DARE I suggest that economic concerns are the primary motivation? Clearly, there is some kind of Democrat "mystique" that I must bow down to in order to avoid the sin of having "assumed".
"Blah blah blah not the only reason blah blah blah diverse blah blah blah not terribly important blah blah blah much more prominently"
If your arguments were true, Blacks would not be consistently voting 90%-plus for the Democrats over the past 30 years. Any intellectually honest person would have to admit that blacks are on the Democrat "plantation" and that tribal and party loyalty trump any other concerns.
"I said the Republicans need to reach out to minorities, which doesn't only include the black community. Look at the Hispanic community in the 2000 elections. They tended to vote Republican.'
OK. Like I asked before, how do the Republicans "reach out"? They appointed the first Black chairman of the joint chiefs, the first and second Black secretaries of state, the first Black party chairman... what more can they do for Blacks?
Yes, the Republicans bent over backwards and focused a huge amount of energy on pandering to Hispanics in 2000. And yes, Hispanics voted for the Republicans... 35 percent of them. Get your facts straight, please. 35% is not "tended to".
"America is not a white nation. It's always been, and will continue to be, a very racially mixed nation."
Once again, get your facts straight. Pre-1965, the country was extremely White, along with a persistent Black minority. The only reason this has changed, and will continue to change, is because our elites (allied with corporate interests) are allowing our country to be INVADED by our "neighbors" to the south.
The country is still, by a significant majority, White. If our elites followed the will of the people, they would stop the invasion and keep this a White majority/Black minority country.
But for some reason Blacks like yourself support the Mestizo invasion. I guess it's that perverted desire to "get back at those Whiteys" who rescued you from the African Hell-on-Earth. But if anything, it's the Black influence that's waning in light of the Mestizo invasion. Since Hispanics have already and will continue to surpass the
Black population in both raw numbers and achievement, the New American Order will no longer have sympathy for massive Black entitlement programs.
Just look at the New York legislature to see how quickly the White-Hispanic alliance makes Blacks irrelevant.
@ Anon - This will probably be the last time I respond to you, since you seem to have a pretty good idea of what I and all other blacks, think and feel (since we are not individuals but one giant, undistinguished mass) and seem to have a superb understanding of black voting patterns (and yes both of those statements are sarcasm). You continue to make assumptions about my political thoughts and beliefs without knowing anything about. This speaks to a wider issue of being unable to distinguish that I, like any other race of person, am an individual with my own political views that don't necessarily coincide with what you seem to believe all black people think.
As my dad used to say when I was growing up, the Lord gave you two ears and one mouth so you can listen twice as much as you talk. Perhaps if the same criticisms keep getting lobbed at the Republican Party, it might be worth it to consider those criticism instead of shutting all of it down as rubbish. Not to say that all criticisms is warranted, but it certainly wouldn't hurt the party to examine it.
And FYI, I didn't say that America wasn't majority white. I said it's not a white nation and never was. Aside from the Native American population that was already here, there was the black (slave) population pretty much since the country's founding, as well as the Asian population that immigrated here starting in the 1800s and the Hispanic population that was absorbed into America with the annexation of Texas along with most of the Southwest. And let's not forget that many groups that are today deemed "white" were not considered as such when they first immigrated here (the Greeks, Italians, and Irish come to mind off the top of my head). The voting patterns of many of those groups were difficult to determine since they were initially denied citizenship and when later granted citizenship systematically denied the ability to vote. So I stand by my assertion that America has always been a racially mixed nation.
Have a nice day.
I'm not surprised you didn't try to respond to anything I wrote. All you have done in this thread is hand-wave, straw-man, and argue orthogonally.
I stand by my points-
"Protected" groups should be able to take a joke without having their heads explode. Straight White Christian Males seem to be able to do it.
Republican "racism" is entirely a creation of the Democrats and the liberal media and therefore there is nothing the Republicans can do about it. Pandering more to the affirmative action and immigration lobbies just gives Democrats license to do more of the same, with no real gain for the Republicans.
If Blacks want any real influence on politics beyond niche issues, they need to get off the Democrat plantation where they are quickly being supplanted by the ever-increasing Hispanic population. America is still a white nation, but Blacks are contributing to their own demise as America's favorite minority.
By the way, I am perfectly capable of distinguishing an individual from a group.
But individuals don't elect politicians, groups do.
This is potentially a great example where experiential knowledge leads to a different conclusion than dispassionate ivory-tower (in your case, computer screen) analysis. Understand that two differing conclusions can 1. both make sense and 2. both not be completely wrong, or both be completely wrong.
In your case, your arguement makes SENSE, it is logical, but it is not necessarily correct. If the universe were ruled by one set of rationality and logic then there would be no such thing as quantum physics or even pi for that matter.
Anyone who knows black people on a personal level, knows that they don't vote Democrat to increase their welfare government benefits as you say. Believe it or not, that kind of attitude is highly frowned on in the black community.
You are correct that most people don't think to much about who they are going to vote for, which actually works more against your hypothesis. Republicans have a "racist" ( -to blacks) brand that they just probably can't get rid of, because they need their committed base and the dems also act to brand their competition. It is all about marketing and branding and target audiences. Blacks won't start buying Abercrombie and Fitch because they use a black model in an ad. Tokenism doesn't work. There is an underlying demographic rivalry between southern whites and black/other minorities on the GROUND level that isn't going to go away quickly. Blacks aren't going to vote republican as long as the GOP relies on confederate flag-waving, NASCAR-watching southern whites, against whom blacks have clashed for centuries. I predict if southern, confederate flag waving whites start mixing their voting patterns again, so too will black voters. I don't know this for certain though. Also note, before you set up a straw man, that I am not saying that southern white republicans are all confederate flag waving 'rednecks', but those that are, are typically republicans, and compete with blacks in society. I posit the black block voting today (not decades ago) is largely reactionary to this particular subset of republicans. Most people don't know that Byrd was a former KKK, or what policies FDR implemented, they just know that the rude lower class white guy speeding along in a pickup truck blasting country music with confederate, NASCAR, and GOP decals plastered all over is a commited republican and "their kind" would be ill-advised to play into the competition's hand. If that subset becomes a distant memory then blacks voting 90% for Dems will also. There is also a "follow Moses out from Egypt" groupthink aspect to it, where prominent black leaders developed close relationships with democrats and continue to bring their followers in through the church community. Since those alliances were forged during Civil Rights, the Dems have them on lock for a generation or two.
Your theory of voting pattern for economic advantage holds water to the extent that the economically disadvantaged as a whole went Dem in the 30s, and that started the shift to blacks voting dem. However the democrats and republicans used to have a more diverse set of viewpoints intraparty, and blacks were able to clearly distinguish between their dixiecrat local government and the northern, urban Dems.
Extrapolation of historical voting patterns as you do from the 30s to the present makes sense, in a textbook, detatched sort of way, however black attitudes today are more shaped by the party branding formed by civil rights movement and its aftermath than a pursuit of economic advantage, which in these days is a SYMPTOM of ethnic block voting, NOT the cause.
If you had actually spoken to blacks about why they vote the way they do, you may have known this, but instead you ignorantly march into a virtual "room full of blacks" and tell them you have figured out their thought patterns by reading a history book as if they were nothing more than lab rats running mazes in an experiment. I'll hope you excercise some more intellectual openess and curiousity next time you decide to speak to another ethnic group you don't belong to and announce you have them figured out. It just makes you appear a bit of a partisan blowhard instead of someone to be listened to.
PS: Reactions to racial jokes may seem like overraction to you, saying they should just live in the moment and forget past transgression, which is slightly odd given your placement of modern voting paterns in the overly rigid context of the 1930s; however unlike whites, blacks have to fight back against other ethnic groups seriously labeling them as stupid, retrograde humans genetically not far away from Homo Erectus, to this very day. See Jensen, Lynn, and their crowd of white pride supporters. Whites don't have that problem from other ethnic groups so they can shake off crude jokes (the Obama example you gave was not an example of this either).
"condescendingly insults me"
I didn't insult you. I think you are being very ...hypersensitive.
"Your assumption that I get my information from "textbooks" rather than actually talking to black people is comical. Of the 500 or so employees where I work, about a third of them are black. I have spoken to many of them about politics and related issues."
Perhaps I should be more clear, since you are misinterpreting everything I write. Your analysis of ethnic voting patterns is the kind of nice two-paragraph explanation that one usually finds in an elementary school textbook. Whether you acually derived your hypothesis from some glib book or not, I have no way of knowing, but it's not descriptive of the motivations of today's black voters, that is all I'm saying.
And that sounds more like office chat than actually knowing someone, but fine.
And your black buddies told you they vote Democrat for welfare benefits, hate crime legislation, and special entitlements? That is what they told you? It's been my experience that voters vote "against" someone more than they vote for someone. Ethnic pride probably entered the equation with black Obama support, but most people including blacks who voted for a Dem like, say, Kerry, were voting AGAINST Bush. And many that voted for Bush weren't too crazy about him either, but they sure didn't want a baby-killing pacifist liberal in the WH (yes I'm exaggerating here). FEAR is the best emotion to influence votes and both sides use it.
"Offensive stereotypes aside"
If you have a better way to describe that portion of the white population of which I speak, please let me know, I'm not trying to offend.
"Instead of putting up tokens like Steele and liberals like McCain, they should focus on their white conservative base. Of course, this is dangerous in a media climate where even mentioning "the white vote" would set off a flurry of racial McCarthyism."
The white conservative base just wasn't big enough to win elections this time around. If they can't muster enough votes to defeat Barack Hussein Obama then they are in dour straights. You don't get that they need to appear to be a cosmopolitan party, not in order to woo blacks which they are never going to attract, but to woo the suburban white middle class who also increasingly tends to be uncomfortable with lower class white southerners appearing to run a political party. Steele is a failure but McCain didn't lose because he was too liberal, he was too old and not quick enough on his feet. I don't think anyone more conservative than McCain would have had a chance in the general.
Also, the media did talk about "the white vote" all the time, both during the Dem primaries and during the general, if you paid the slightest attention. No racial McCarthyism there, maybe you can point it out to me??
"Those same "ethnic groups" that just put a black family in the White House?"
I should have said certain members of other ethnic groups. Obviously it is not a whole ethnic group doing this, you are playing semantics in order to score cheap points.
"At what point do we take blacks down off that pedestal?"
Blacks are on a pedestal they need to be taken off of? By who? Could you please elaborate on this sentiment?
"By the way, the blacks I work with seem to enjoy a little racial humor once in a while. It's the white PC liberals who usually get caught up the frenzy of vicarious victimhood."
Ok, well next time you see a picture of a monkey in front of your coworkers, why don't you mention how much it looks like the POTUS and see how many daps you can get for your witty toungue. Personally, despite my ambivalence toward it, I haven't found racial humor to be popular anywhere outside of high school but maybe you live in a more tolerant area.
I was trying to make peace. For the sake of James' blog, this will be my last response on this thread. Feel free to respond in the same tone in order to have the "last word".
"I didn't insult you. I think you are being very ...hypersensitive."
You said to me: "you ignorantly march into a virtual "room full of blacks" and tell them you have figured out their thought patterns by reading a history book as if they were nothing more than lab rats running mazes in an experiment". I guess I should have taken that as a compliment.
"Whether you acually derived your hypothesis from some glib book or not, I have no way of knowing, but it's not descriptive of the motivations of today's black voters, that is all I'm saying."
Because you have the final say on what is and is not descriptive of today's black voters? Ok, got it. I'll shut up and listen from now on.
"And your black buddies told you they vote Democrat for welfare benefits, hate crime legislation, and special entitlements? That is what they told you?"
Not in so many words, but they did use expressions like "equality", "justice", "racism", and "oppression". Nevertheless, my point was that the Democrats have framed themselves as the pro-black party by embracing these issues. If the Democrats were pushing for pure meritocracy and freedom while the the Republicans were pushing affirmative action and hate speech laws, I think there would have been a substantial defection.
"If you have a better way to describe that portion of the white population of which I speak, please let me know, I'm not trying to offend."
The word "rude" in the description of pickup-man was completely unnecessary. The allusions to NASCAR were also unnecessary. The racist term "redneck" was unnecessary. Think about the black equivalent of this stereotype and you might understand why your intentionally abrasive choice of words was not appropriate to a civil discussion.
"The white conservative base just wasn't big enough to win elections this time around. If they can't muster enough votes to defeat Barack Hussein Obama then they are in dour straights."
I don't think there's conclusive evidence to support that. McCain was anointed largely by the liberal media, and conservatives were not motivated to get out and vote for him. I agree that Marxism and guilt have consumed a great portion of whites in this country, but I think that there are enough white conservatives in this country to win an election if they had a candidate to get behind.
"McCain didn't lose because he was too liberal, he was too old and not quick enough on his feet."
I disagree. McCain held his own with Obama in the debates, despite the age difference. Obama was consistently on the defensive, agreeing with McCain on every salient issue and (rightfully) expecting identity politics to carry the day. Perhaps not, but Obama-McCain does not provide conclusive evidence one way or the other.
"Also, the media did talk about "the white vote" all the time"
The media often talked about white women, but not whites in general, and certainly not as something the candidates should try to appeal to. But I wasn't talking about the media, I was talking about the parties and candidates raising the white issue themselves.
"Blacks are on a pedestal they need to be taken off of? By who? Could you please elaborate on this sentiment?"
Just judging by the first few comments in this thread, blacks are uniquely "off-limits" with regard to criticism and comedy. - "Some folks want to pretend that they do not understand why disrespecting this black woman is off the table."
First Ladies, especially those who have taken active roles, have been ripe for criticism before. Why is this one off-limits? Well, there seems to be one obvious difference...
"Personally, despite my ambivalence toward it, I haven't found racial humor to be popular anywhere outside of high school but maybe you live in a more tolerant area."
Watch any stand-up comedian, especially black stand-up comedians. These people make their livings by making people laugh. And a great deal of their humor is racial. Watch "black movies" like "How High", "White Chicks", or "Soul Plane" and you will find almost exclusively racial humor. This is not some obscure phenomenon, it's about as mainstream as they come.
Just for the sake of completeness, I should add that it was unnecessary for you to invoke country music and the Confederate flag as well. If you want to talk about southern whites, talk about them without resorting to stereotypes. That is, if you really oppose bigotry in all cases.
By the way, "dour straights" should probably be "dire straits". But I guess I learned that in a textbook, so who knows?
"I guess I should have taken that as a compliment."
Just because something's not a compliment doesn't make it an insult. It was a description of your actions that you happen to disagree with.
"Not in so many words, but they did use expressions like "equality", "justice", "racism", and "oppression". Nevertheless, my point was that the Democrats have framed themselves as the pro-black party by embracing these issues. If the Democrats were pushing for pure meritocracy and freedom while the the Republicans were pushing affirmative action and hate speech laws, I think there would have been a substantial defection."
I don't think they were necessarily thinking of A.A. or hate crime legislation, but since it seems you didn't ask them to explain what they meant by those terms, that example's outlived its usefulness. Also, while Republicans claim to be for pure meritocracy now, that doesn't mean many people believe them. With the Civil rights struggle still historically fresh, Republicans are still the "other side" of that conflict. As that conflict fades from memory, so too will the disbelief at their motives.
"Just judging by the first few comments in this thread, blacks are uniquely "off-limits" with regard to criticism and comedy. - 'Some folks want to pretend that they do not understand why disrespecting this black woman is off the table.'
First Ladies, especially those who have taken active roles, have been ripe for criticism before. Why is this one off-limits? Well, there seems to be one obvious difference..."
The first comment was by you, Mr. Angry Disenfranchised White Guy, crying about racial hypersensitivity before any other commenter had even said anything. That probably pushed other commenters to respond more stridently than they otherwise would have.
Also, I don't believe Michelle has taken much of an active role in policy. She's no Hillary.
"Watch any stand-up comedian, especially black stand-up comedians. These people make their livings by making people laugh. And a great deal of their humor is racial. Watch "black movies" like "How High", "White Chicks", or "Soul Plane" and you will find almost exclusively racial humor. This is not some obscure phenomenon, it's about as mainstream as they come."
I'm speaking in everyday life. People usually watch stand up comics in part to hear them say things no one else would say. I've never been in an office where people sit around and crack racial jokes. Sounds very unprofessional to me. But that's not the point, comedians are a whole different class of people. You can't hold DePass or Obama for that matter to the same standards as Chris Rock. This should be obvious.
"Just for the sake of completeness, I should add that it was unnecessary for you to invoke country music and the Confederate flag as well. If you want to talk about southern whites, talk about them without resorting to stereotypes. That is, if you really oppose bigotry in all cases."
Is there something wrong with listening to country music or watching NASCAR? I certainly never said there was, which if I did, would be bigotry. And is it not true that many of these Southern Whites love to display the confederate flag? Saying just "Southern whites" is too catch-all. Southern Whites can be homosexual atheist liberals. I whittled "Southern Whites" down with descriptions that are accurate to the best of my knowledge. Like I said, if you have a better way to refer to this group of people, let me know.
"By the way, "dour straights" should probably be "dire straits". But I guess I learned that in a textbook, so who knows?"
Hey, you got me nailed there! Can you do me a favor and run my posts through Spellcheck also, I think I made a few more irrelevant errors somewhere.
Racism is such a tired subject because it appears blacks like to think they are incapable of such a thing which is hogwash.
I see many black co workers wearing Obama shirts after he won the election.
If there had been a white man elected that was as popular with blacks as Obama and the only difference at all was skin color not a single shirt would have been worn by a black person much less even made to start with.
The only reason Obama shirts are worn is because he is black.
That's racism too.
I want to say that the drawing of Michelle is really exceptional.... I haven't been too impressed with the other art work on this blog but THAT one is really fabulous...
BWBTT: Your back-handed praise makes all my hard work worthwhile. Thanks. BTW, I am digging your site nonetheless.
Post a Comment