Forum Settings
       
1 2 Next »
Reply To Thread

Why the fuss over the NY Post political cartoon?Follow

#27 Feb 20 2009 at 12:26 PM Rating: Decent
****
8,619 posts
Pathetic over reaction from all conserned.
#28 Feb 20 2009 at 10:23 PM Rating: Good
*****
16,160 posts
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29305502/

This article illustrates exactly the problem facing cartoonists today. Due to lame PC-ness we are hobbled by expectations and demands from hyper-sensitive groups that we not subject their particular demographic to the scrutiny and satire that is placed on fair-game targets, ie white people and men.

The result is an unbalanced and critical examination of these demographic's successes, failures, and perhaps most importantly, their mediocrity.

Totem
#29 Feb 20 2009 at 10:29 PM Rating: Good
Vagina Dentata,
what a wonderful phrase
******
30,106 posts
Oh, the White Man's Burden.
____________________________
Turin wrote:
Seriously, what the f*ck nature?
#30 Feb 20 2009 at 10:53 PM Rating: Good
*****
16,160 posts
So you don't really care about open and frank political discourse, Anna? After all, it's not a very large leap to go from reluctance to examine critically your political leadership due to some arbitrary parameter to just refusing to critique your leadership in general out of fear of retribution, penalties, imprisonment, or on pain of death.

Since when has the American press handed it's balls to the government it is supposed to be reporting on? Oh. That's right. It happened the moment a possible descendant of a slave got elected in a country that has made greater strides in racial equality than any other in the history of mankind.

Totem
#31 Feb 20 2009 at 11:01 PM Rating: Excellent
Vagina Dentata,
what a wonderful phrase
******
30,106 posts
Totem wrote:
So you don't really care about open and frank political discourse, Anna? After all, it's not a very large leap to go from reluctance to examine critically your political leadership due to some arbitrary parameter to just refusing to critique your leadership in general out of fear of retribution, penalties, imprisonment, or on pain of death.

Since when has the American press handed it's balls to the government it is supposed to be reporting on? Oh. That's right. It happened the moment a possible descendant of a slave got elected in a country that has made greater strides in racial equality than any other in the history of mankind.

Totem


You mean people protesting, questioning the portrayal of a president? Free speech goes both ways. It's not just for self-righteous white men to bemoan the oversensitiveness of others. If you really believe that satire is supposed to offend, even poorly conceived ones such as the unfunny cartoon you referenced, you shouldn't bemoan the fact that it did provoke the reaction of people who apparently matter to the NY Post.

I mean, Jesus, Natalie Maines made one minor complaint about the president in England and republicans were out in force, steamrolling her records and banning it from the radio. That was all par for the course, wasn't it. That and Freedom Fries.

Free speech isn't just designed for you to throw your sh*t around like a fecophiliac. It's an interactive process. You give sh*t, you best be ready to take it.


Edited, Feb 21st 2009 2:05am by Annabella
____________________________
Turin wrote:
Seriously, what the f*ck nature?
#32 Feb 20 2009 at 11:21 PM Rating: Good
*****
16,160 posts
The funny thing is I suspect I'm far more agreeable to wide open discourse than you or most people. Just because I deride someone for their ideas-- Maines, for example --doesn't mean I believe they should be prevented from doing so, either via public sentiment or by law.

Totem
#33 Feb 20 2009 at 11:40 PM Rating: Excellent
Vagina Dentata,
what a wonderful phrase
******
30,106 posts
Totem wrote:
The funny thing is I suspect I'm far more agreeable to wide open discourse than you or most people. Just because I deride someone for their ideas-- Maines, for example --doesn't mean I believe they should be prevented from doing so, either via public sentiment or by law.

Totem


Who is calling for censorship here, Totem? Are you trying to take any controversy and cry oppression? As if the right is being silenced, especially after the hyperreaction of republicans in the last eight years, which included the kowtowing of the press. I didn't forget those "press conferences" Bush had or the insinuations from the right that liberals aren't real Americans and maybe should be shot or jailed or liberals should be tried for sedition.
Don't be such a hypocrite with a short memory.

Of course, I think the right is looking to use this for political mileage so they can seem oppressed by the big bad liberal media and gain some semblance of political traction. Or have something fun to write in their columns for the Rush fanboys.

I think that there is a misconception out there that somehow white men are the only people freely criticized. It's a myth. We all get criticized. They can characterize Obama however and you know, people--even black people-- are entitled to express their feelings. The comic artist, just as you, will survive the withering disappointment of not getting a lolly every time you go to the bathroom.

I survived eight years being a ***** liberal woman with Bush in the white house with all with the sketchy, Godless, devil-worshipping, entitlement grabbing, PC-being, Europhile, terrorist supporting, blame America firsting and maybe fisting, but in sensible shoes that apparently it implies. You republicans can survive people being protesting when they think a black man is being portrayed as an ape in a cartoon that doesn't really make much @#%^ing sense.

Smiley: mad

Quote:
But Sharpton said the Post should clarify the point it was trying to make with the cartoon, which was playing off Monday's rampage by a pet chimpanzee in Stamford, Conn., that left a woman severely mauled. Police ended up killing the chimp.


Asking to clarifying the point or feeling offended or people thinking that they are owed an apology /=censorship. It's people expressing their opinion.





Edited, Feb 21st 2009 2:51am by Annabella
____________________________
Turin wrote:
Seriously, what the f*ck nature?
#34 Feb 21 2009 at 1:03 AM Rating: Good
*****
16,160 posts
Actually I still get a lolly for every time I go use the bathroom, but in your particular case perhaps you getting a good solid phallic lollying from a member of the male sex would do your comfortable shoe wearin' heart some good. Nothing cures those angry red faced emoticons like a nice leisurely ***** and ******.

Take it under advisement, lez.

Totem
#35 Feb 21 2009 at 1:16 AM Rating: Good
Vagina Dentata,
what a wonderful phrase
******
30,106 posts
Totem wrote:
Actually I still get a lolly for every time I go use the bathroom, but in your particular case perhaps you getting a good solid phallic lollying from a member of the male sex would do your comfortable shoe wearin' heart some good. Nothing cures those angry red faced emoticons like a nice leisurely ***** and ******.

Take it under advisement, lez.

Totem


Smiley: lolSmiley: lol'

Wait, are you still in Angola?

Edited, Feb 21st 2009 4:33am by Annabella
____________________________
Turin wrote:
Seriously, what the f*ck nature?
#36 Feb 21 2009 at 3:49 AM Rating: Good
*****
16,160 posts
Yep, still in Angola until next week. That being said, I can see that even reading my advice has generated a couple smiley emoticons. Amazing what a big black d1ck can do even from thousands of miles away...

:D

Totem
#37 Feb 21 2009 at 12:21 PM Rating: Decent
Quote:
I mean, Jesus, Natalie Maines made one minor complaint about the president in England and republicans were out in force, steamrolling her records and banning it from the radio. That was all par for the course, wasn't it. That and Freedom Fries.


There is no president in England!
1 2 Next »
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 194 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (194)