P On Me and Tell Me It's Rain

[TJJJ]

Originally Posted by Aquila

I think it demonstrates a lack of sensitivity. Most likely those who produced the cartoon didn't mean anything racial by it. However, given our nation's history of racism, the fact that we just elected a black President, and how race has been front and center in politics today...the cartoonist and the paper should have considered that this could be deemed racially offensive to the black community. I think they just weren't thinking it all the way through. I think a public apology is all that's needed. And from this point forward be more careful. For starters, avoid any "monkey references" in relation to politics.

Amen!

[Jermyn Davidson]

Originally Posted by Truthseeker

Bump for Bro davidson, what are your thoughts on the above pictures?

What many folks fail to understand is the source of the offense.

The cartoon is offensive because:

it portrays President Obama to a monkey. Yes, GWB was ref'd to as a monkey too, but it did not carry the same connotations at all. There are historical connotations to comparing Blacks to monkeys and everything else less than human, in this country-- this is where the deepest part of the offense comes in; and,

the monkey is shot dead, by cops muttering a reference to the stimulus bill. I know, folks will say that President Obama wasn't the sole author, but for political purposes, that stimulus package was his baby-- as he is the one who would have been judged ineffective if he could not have "gotten it passed" in Congress and he will be judged if it succeeds or fails our country. At the bare minimum, this was a tacit reference to killing the perceived author of the stimulus package.



Furthermore, the fact is that police officers are not perceived well in many Black communities because of police brutality and the unnecessary killing of Black males (in particular) by the police in various situations, some of the situations not so questionable but some of the situations have indeed been nothing less than criminal.

That cartoon raised SO MANY bad feelings-- I am really not doing a good job at trying to describe and I am not even my Dad's age. To tell you the truth, I don't think my Dad even cared to see it as we both know the deep resentment it could bring up.




The fact that some in our country would defend the cartoon as something not racist is also deeply offensive, as if to ignore the past hatred that has plagued our country.



So to compare the GWB ref's to monkeys to BHO ref's to monkeys are not good comparisons at all.

[TJJJ]

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson

What many folks fail to understand is the source of the offense.

The cartoon is offensive because:

it portrays President Obama to a monkey. Yes, GWB was ref'd to as a monkey too, but it did not carry the same connotations at all. There are historical connotations to comparing Blacks to monkeys and everything else less than human, in this country-- this is where the deepest part of the offense comes in; and,

the monkey is shot dead, by cops muttering a reference to the stimulus bill. I know, folks will say that President Obama wasn't the sole author, but for political purposes, that stimulus package was his baby-- as he is the one who would have been judged ineffective if he could not have "gotten it passed" in Congress and he will be judged if it succeeds or fails our country. At the bare minimum, this was a tacit reference to killing the perceived author of the stimulus package.



Furthermore, the fact is that police officers are not perceived well in many Black communities because of police brutality and the unnecessary killing of Black males (in particular) by the police in various situations, some of the situations not so questionable but some of the situations have indeed been nothing less than criminal.

That cartoon raised SO MANY bad feelings-- I am really not doing a good job at trying to describe and I am not even my Dad's age. To tell you the truth, I don't think my Dad even cared to see it as we both know the deep resentment it could bring up.




The fact that some in our country would defend the cartoon as something not racist is also deeply offensive, as if to ignore the past hatred that has plagued our country.



So to compare the GWB ref's to monkeys to BHO ref's to monkeys are not good comparisons at all.

Jermyn, I totally agree with you on this. The catoon was absolutely uncalled for. I do not believe that it is going to go away though.

Again, we are dealing with the works of the flesh! Only the Holy Ghost can help this situation.

[Jermyn Davidson]

I wonder if you were to know my Dad's thoughts in response to this kind of stuff would you all think he was racist or at the bare minimum, still dealing with bitterness? As easy as it would be to judge him, I haven't even walked 10 feet in his shoes-- forget 1 mile-- and I am his step son!

There are folks who would state that the cartoon was not offensive and should never have ben perceived as such. To those folks I state, you just don't know.

[Truthseeker]

Originally Posted by Truthseeker

For all practical purposes a mixed child will be treated as black person. What most white parents say if their daughter brought home a biracial boy, I owuld bet my last dollar it would be why you bring that 1/2 white boy over.

I understand your point, biracial kids must be prepared to enter the world being place in the black category, I hate that considering my children biracial.

Also remember even though a slave had children by white man they were consider black to keep them under slavery, not recognizing their whiteness makes that easy, just class them all black to keep more workers. So when some blacks say if you have one ounce of black in you then your black according to the government they are using oppressive slave rules.

While this all in the past, it shows where some present mindset come from.

Wow did I type error the above to death. Work 12 hours last nite, that's my excuse. LOL

[Truthseeker]

it's common sense that certain terms and words have a deep rooted history to them that can offend or cause pain. Knowing this, regardless of motive, why use them??

[Jermyn Davidson]

Originally Posted by Aquila

I think it demonstrates a lack of sensitivity. Most likely those who produced the cartoon didn't mean anything racial by it.

Nay-men!

Hence, the title of this thread.


How could they have not meant anything racial about it?

We're not talking about folks like Sweet Miss Renda!

We are talking about folks who know the power of the printed media, folks who cater to a certain demographic who have within it's group those who would find that kind of stuff "funny-in-a-politically-incorrect-kind-of-way", folks who are trying to create a name for themselves, but at the expense of Black folks.


Whatever happened to the concept of RESPONSIBLE JOURNALISM?

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson

Nay-men!

Hence, the title of this thread.


How could they have not meant anything racial about it?

We're not talking about folks like Sweet Miss Renda!

We are talking about folks who know the power of the printed media, folks who cater to a certain demographic who have within it's group those who would find that kind of stuff "funny-in-a-politically-incorrect-kind-of-way", folks who are trying to create a name for themselves, but at the expense of Black folks.


Whatever happened to the concept of RESPONSIBLE JOURNALISM?

It's gone. I think journalism today is a farce. You have private institutions that are either propaganda producers for the right or the left...both spin stories to benefit their causes and the REAL news isn't being reported. Most Americans are polarized and only know the talking points for or against their political interest and political enemies. Few know what's really going on. News isn't news anymore. Journalism isn't journalism anymore. It's like when that Fox reporter wanted to report a story on a pharmaceutical company and the company threatened to sue Fox News. Fox basically sidelined the story to avoid fighting a lawsuit. It was mentioned as a "blurb" but the in depth investigative piece was never given to the public.

[OldTimey]

Originally Posted by TJJJ

Webster's describes our current president's race as following:

MULAT'TO, n. [L. mulus, a mule.] A person that is the offspring of a negress by a white man, or of a white woman by a negro.

Don't be offended at me folks, I am quoting Mr Webster!

I think you need to go dictionary shopping. That's not a current definition.

[Digging4Truth]

Originally Posted by Sam

yes, see below or
http://web.mit.edu/margret/www/myndi...bush_chimp.jpg

LOL... good chimp comparisons. That was funny.

Personally. I am not convinced that the cartoon was drawn with racist intentions.

But... those demanding such have their apology now so... done deal.