The Tea Party are RACIST!!

[jillio]

No need to get personal.

You are entitled to your opinion. *shrug" Until you have hard facts to support it, it's just opinion. I have the right to disagree with that opinion and treat it like "Texas signed" "PhD" and other "facts".

Just because you choose to ignore the facts doesn't mean that they don't exist. It simply means that you make a choice not to believe anything that doesn't support your particular agenda. Just like the members of the Tea Party....

 

[jillio]

Well, I think enough time has passed at this point in his presidency that there are plenty of legitimate concerns to critique him on, but for the first year or so, I have absolutely no doubt that most of the vitriolic criticisms of him were racially motivated.

**nodding** And therefore, any criticisms that even appear to have a racial overtone is even more suspect because there are valid issues that could be brought up. That is what makes something such as this email scream "racial intent." There is no other valid reason for the content.

 

[jillio]

Well, I think enough time has passed at this point in his presidency that there are plenty of legitimate concerns to critique him on, but for the first year or so, I have absolutely no doubt that most of the vitriolic criticisms of him were racially motivated.

**nodding** And therefore, any criticism that even appears to have a racial overtone is even more suspect because there are valid issues that could be brought up. That is what makes something such as this email scream "racial intent." There is no other valid reason for the content.

 

[Steinhauer]

I already asked. Were the democrats that mocked Bush and made SEVERAL pictures of him looking like a monkey also racists?

 

[saywhatkid]

It simply means that you make a choice not to believe anything that doesn't support your particular agenda.

I think that holds true for a whole bunch of people, possibly including me.

 

[jillio]

I already asked. Were the democrats that mocked Bush and made SEVERAL pictures of him looking like a monkey also racists?

That question was answered in several posts on the first page. Scroll back and read.

 

[Beowulf]

I already asked. Were the democrats that mocked Bush and made SEVERAL pictures of him looking like a monkey also racists?

Nope. I still refer to Bush as a smirking chimp, mainly because of his conspicuous lack of intelligence.

 

[Beach girl]

That question was answered in several posts on the first page. Scroll back and read.

Actually, no one ever answered it. There was a lot of ducking and weaving. But no one answered. No one said they also deplored the images of Bush (possibly excepting Reba, who said she was against denigrating cartoons and e-mails). No one seemed to have any problem with that huge billboard of Bush made up of monkey images.

Maybe if we all treated Obama with the respect shown to Bush, maybe we'd all be ok?

Oh...wait....

 

[Beowulf]

Actually, no one ever answered it. There was a lot of ducking and weaving. But no one answered. No one said they also deplored the images of Bush (possibly excepting Reba, who said she was against denigrating cartoons and e-mails). No one seemed to have any problem with that huge billboard of Bush made up of monkey images.

Maybe if we all treated Obama with the respect shown to Bush, maybe we'd all be ok?

Oh...wait....

Yep, but if you look at the billboards, you would do a double take at Bush next to the chimps. I mean, the resemblance is SO striking, whoaaa.

 

[Reba]

Just because you choose to ignore the facts doesn't mean that they don't exist. It simply means that you make a choice not to believe anything that doesn't support your particular agenda. Just like the members of the Tea Party....

What does TXgolfer have to do with members of the Tea Party?

 

[Reba]

Where is Levonian when we need him?!

 

[TXgolfer]

Just because you choose to ignore the facts doesn't mean that they don't exist. It simply means that you make a choice not to believe anything that doesn't support your particular agenda. Just like the members of the Tea Party....

"Texas signed the treaty of 1812" proved incorrect.

http://www.alldeaf.com/current-events/78052-arizona-secede-4.html

(Starts on page 4 for newbies)

As for this claim you have made I don't see any proof that you have provided. It remains a claim....

 

[TWA]

I already asked. Were the democrats that mocked Bush and made SEVERAL pictures of him looking like a monkey also racists?

Actually, no one ever answered it. There was a lot of ducking and weaving. But no one answered. No one said they also deplored the images of Bush (possibly excepting Reba, who said she was against denigrating cartoons and e-mails). No one seemed to have any problem with that huge billboard of Bush made up of monkey images.

Maybe if we all treated Obama with the respect shown to Bush, maybe we'd all be ok?

Oh...wait....

The answer to that question is implicit in the posts already made. Ducking and weaving? Um...

Okay, I'll spell it out if that's what you'd like:

No, the comparisons of Bush to a monkey were not racist. How could they be? Bush is a white male. There is no historical context of racial epithets being made towards white people by comparing them to monkeys. There is a historical context of comparing politicians to monkeys, as you pointed out, and it is certainly in bad taste. Those caricatures comparing politicians to monkeys and apes seem to have protection under the guise of "political satire," but in the case of Obama, that protection is superseded by the racial epithet.

Is that more clear? I'm not even sure why you're asking the question. I don't want to sound dogmatic here, but seriously, I don't understand how anybody can question whether or not this is racist.

 

[Steel X]

Okay so...how is that racist when Bush got the same treatment when he was monked as an ape or something like that? There's always gonna be cartoons making fun of the political system. They didn't say anything about him as a Black man or anything like that.

 

[saywhatkid]

The answer to that question is implicit in the posts already made. Ducking and weaving? Um...

Okay, I'll spell it out if that's what you'd like:

No, the comparisons of Bush to a monkey were not racist. How could they be? Bush is a white male. There is no historical context of racial epithets being made towards white people by comparing them to monkeys. There is a historical context of comparing politicians to monkeys, as you pointed out, and it is certainly in bad taste. Those caricatures comparing politicians to monkeys and apes seem to have protection under the guise of "political satire," but in the case of Obama, that protection is superseded by the racial epithet.

Is that more clear? I'm not even sure why you're asking the question. I don't want to sound dogmatic here, but seriously, I don't understand how anybody can question whether or not this is racist.

I remember Howard Cosell lost his job as football announcer for making a comment about "Look at the little monkey run" when describing a black athlete. He was a strong advocate for racial equality, but it did not matter. Many cries went out for his head.

Nobody can determine the intent of the sender of this email. We can only speculate. I do know that there is nothing racist if a white person is depicted as a monkey/watermelon eater. If someone made a comment about "Obama loves his watermelon" the racist overtones would be there. That is just the way it is. Rice eater = Asian. Bean eater = Mexican. Those are not my depictions, but they are phrases commonly used in a racist manner.

 

[TXgolfer]

Well, I think enough time has passed at this point in his presidency that there are plenty of legitimate concerns to critique him on, but for the first year or so, I have absolutely no doubt that most of the vitriolic criticisms of him were racially motivated.

You are talking about the same people who were kissing Colin Powell's ass and begging him to run, so while yes there are some racists I don't belive the number at any time approached "majority"

I would also bet that the number of people who voted FOR obama based on skin color alone is at least equal to the number of people who voted AGAINST him based on skin color alone. Just a guess though

 

[darkdog]

Well, I think enough time has passed at this point in his presidency that there are plenty of legitimate concerns to critique him on, but for the first year or so, I have absolutely no doubt that most of the vitriolic criticisms of him were racially motivated.

Just curious- what would you define as a vitriolic criticism as opposed to a legitimate concern? Are there any criticisms that you feel fall are not legitimate but not quite vitriolic either?

 

[Beowulf]

Just curious- what would you define as a vitriolic criticism as opposed to a legitimate concern? Are there any criticisms that you feel fall are not legitimate but not quite vitriolic either?

How about this: it was between Urkel and Grandpa Simpson and no contest?

 

[saywhatkid]

You are talking about the same people who were kissing Colin Powell's ass and begging him to run, so while yes there are some racists I don't belive the number at any time approached "majority"

I would also bet that the number of people who voted FOR obama based on skin color alone is at least equal to the number of people who voted AGAINST him based on skin color alone. Just a guess though

Well, that would not have been helpful for Obama. If 10% of each race was racist enough to vote that way, the numbers would be pretty strongly in favor of McCain/Palin.

 

[darkdog]

How about this: it was between Urkel and Grandpa Simpson and no contest?

I don't understand what you're talking about.