Wow. Overgeneralize much, Dr. No? -- RR
Obama as ''THE JOKER'' Controversy!!
- Thread starter miraclefan
- Start date
Wow. Overgeneralize much, Dr. No? -- RR
Okay, let's take Obama out of the equation, because as evidenced by your extremely offensive to actual Holocaust victims sig, when Obama is involved you lose all touch with reality.
What you seem to be saying here is that if someone is knowledgeable of the long history of offensive caricatures depicting black people with apelike features (something which does not have a frequently depicted or racially-based history with white people), that in fact makes them a racist. That doesn't make an ounce of sense.
Recognizing the existence of and tools of racism does not make one a racist. And not recognizing them doesn't make one virtuous and absent of racism, it simply makes one ignorant of history if they've reached an age where they can have experienced it or learned about it.
Accusing those who comment on racism of being racists themselves when there's nothing to support that is just a cheapshot designed to get your opponent in the discussion off-balance. It's amateur-hour tactics at best, and considering your later comments here (which I'll just give you the benefit of the doubt on and assume aren't dripping with clearly evident sarcasm), would in fact make you a racist by your own bizarre definition.
So, we'll add poor reading comprehension and/or laziness to your skill-set then, because had you read the entire thread you'd see I found nothing offensive or racist about the Obama/Joker poster, I just found it to be idiotic and making false comparisons. So clearly, not just out looking for anything to be offended by.
Let's take an example of the word "spook." Thankfully, kind of an out-of-date racial slur nowadays, I know, but it works as an example. Now, were you to call a white man and a black man the same word, using your interpretation of racism neither or both should get equally offended and for the same reasons, even though historically the word has an entirely different context when applied to black people. A white man might just take it to mean they're being creepy or that they're behaving like a spy. So, still possibly insulting, but lacking the additional racial component that it would have when applied to a black man.
The caricatures of Bush as a chimp, while still insulting, have no racial component to them because there's no history of comparing white people to apes as a racial slur. It was a commentary on Bush's facial expressions and intelligence. A poorly thought-out one to be sure, and extremely rude, but not racist in any way.
Yeah what is up with that signature? That's what we call offensive. And it has nothing to do with racism.
Because asking people to submit examples of erroneous information about health care reform so it can be rebutted on the White House blog is exactly the same as informing on the location of Jews and exterminating them in Gertch's world apparently. That's taking hyperbole to the furthest extent I've seen on this board, except for one similar example on the same issue in TNZ yesterday, and even that guy didn't come right out and make the Holocaust comparison directly, though he hinted at it.
Let's just post that one for posterity in case Gertch decides that was even way over-the-top for him and changes it:
What a pant load you typed out there. 
This is why you can't have meaningful discussions with some people. Just can't help but try to insult at every turn. There's part of the problem, people holding a grudge due to history. Why are some people so resistant to change...
Turns out you'll all be able to rant about racism some more as another Harvard professor is complaining about his arrest - 3 years ago.
Oh crap, you got me!!!! Damn. Don't forget to turn me in to the government - flag@whitehouse.gov.
Looks like a good place for an Obama Joker threadbomb.
You and meaningful discussion haven't met in well over a year. Post something of value and you'll get the same from others in return. Your commentary on anything political is a complete joke and has been for quite a while.
I could write your posts for you at this point. Say something outrageous or false without evidence or common sense, get called on it, and then turn the response back around on the person making it by claiming a position of civil and reasonable discussion which you never held.
So if someone is called a racist name, they should just shut up about it lest they be accused of holding a grudge? Really, is this the position you want to defend?
Funny, I seem to recall stating that I had no knowledge of whether the officer in question was racist or not in the last thread, and made no such judgment call. Which you should know since you responded to the post I made that comment in.
Why not? Makes about as much sense (ie., none) using it here as it does anywhere else. Nonsensically tagging something with "socialism" and an evil fictional character to be outrageous for the sake of shock value is about as stupid as comparing a blog seeking to rebut factual errors with informing on Jews in hiding during WWII, though yours takes an extra leap into tastelessness.
Yeah, that sig is offensive and needs to go.
I understand many people go through life looking for a reason to open his mouth without any knowledge about what they are talking about. Funny, uh?
What? And what you say is not insulting?
Plus one. Come on, it's completely over the top. It's not a matter of right-wing or left-wing: it's about using a veritable human tragedy as a (really) cheap political point. It's indefensible.
That's because they're conservative.
First we're talking about a picture and now your shifting the discussion to name calling? Really, is that how you really want to obfuscate your position?
Funny, I don't seem to recall mentioning that last thread here, in this thread. You know, the thread you've talked about racism in.
If you bothered to read earlier I did say the Joker poster as it was was ridiculous.
If anyone is offended by events happening on same days but different years DON'T google Lincoln and Kennedy! No! Don't do it!
As for the Whitehouse asking for people to snitch I would think the same people going ballistic over the Patriot Act would be equally alarmed over this. But I guess for some it depends on what side of the aisle the power sits. I for one am really looking forward to that "blog" of anti-propaganda so we can finally correct all of Obama's misconceptions on his healthcare bill.
Without the winkie that would be the wrong party. With the winkie it almost seems like trolling.That's because they're conservative.
The poster is not racist. It is however not a good image. Last I checked, President Obama was not a murdering, psychotic sociopath.
S
Stone_Cold_Sisko
Guest
The guy who originally photoshopped this just took a TIME magazine cover, and photoshopped him as the Joker (nice Photoshop work, but i don't really see the linkage in subject matter). Had nothing about socialism, in fact the guy kept all the TIME cover blurbs.
Someone else took the image, snipped out the TIME cover blurb text and put the word socialism under it (such creativity!). Anyone scratching their head wondering how Obama is like the Ledger Joker or what the Joker has to do with socialism, don't bother, the linkage isnt there.
Someone else took the image, snipped out the TIME cover blurb text and put the word socialism under it (such creativity!). Anyone scratching their head wondering how Obama is like the Ledger Joker or what the Joker has to do with socialism, don't bother, the linkage isnt there.
That's the biggest bullshit excuse for your sig. So what if they happened on the same day? That makes no difference. Take it down now.
Can you drop this little crusade in Misc. He'll change it if and when the admins ask him to.
Or it could be the answer to your question, that being the definition of the word and all.Without the winkie that would be the wrong party. With the winkie it almost seems like trolling.That's because they're conservative.
Edit: Considering I had to revise this twice for typos let me just put it this way: This isn't a crusade, I'm replying to an offensive sig and don't see that being a problem.
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Locked
