Humans are one species of ape, so of course there are clear similarities in appearance (and differences also, chiefly that humans are nearly bald over most of their bodies). For instance, we can recognize a wide range of facial expressions in apes, and associate them with comparable expressions in humans. These similarities are stronger or weaker depending on the moment, but exist for any human individual. Exploiting the similarity to parody a public figure as an ape or monkey is commonplace, and should be
The hypocrisy and faux outrage of the left wing in the US is more than a little disturbing and starting to become a little overwhelming to the point that it's truly starting to taint my view of the entire movement. It's not like they don't remember 18 months ago when they were still doing the *exact same things* to the bush admin as is being done here. Calling them Nazi's, the underlying racism against Rice and Powell, calling Powell a pet, token black, etc (until he changed to their "side" that is), the
Hypocrisy is using something like this, which is really bipartisan in treatment and trying to blame it on a particular political movement and then inferring from that that they are somehow the hypocrits.
The reason there was no uproar when it was done to Bush and Rice is because they were almost universally hated by the majority of the media at that point, whilst Michelle Obama has managed to maintain her place as a media darling just as many others have before her for some time.
Really, the reason people like Michelle Obama become media sweathearts nearly always has fuck all to do with her political stance and more to do with how she's been growing lettuce in the Whitehouse garden and what dresses she wears and other dumb shit like that.
I agree it stinks, why is it racist when they turn Michell Obama into a monkey and not George Bush? But blame media idiocy for creating Saint Michelle, partisan politics frankly has fuck all to do with it. It's little different to the media creating Saint Dianna after Princess Dianna died in a car crash despite the fact for months prior she'd been pointed out as a slut who had literally sworn at small children who ran up to her to get the chance to meet a real princess. If the media brings politics into it to defend their latest Saint then realise it for what it is- the media just using whatever it can to defend said Saint because it sells, don't stoop to their level of idiocy though and blame that whole political wing else you become the hypocrit.
To put it in another, more simplistic way, if this had been about a black actress, would you still have brought political leaning into it?
Here's the left wing bias: We never saw anything like this when Condolezza Rice was photoshopped (any of the numerous times). Another example is the "Joker Face" images. Do it to Obama and it's some sort of crazy Racist propaganda. Do it to Bush, and you get published in magazines for clever political satire. The bias is obviously there, since it seems any time it happens to the left, there's some huge controversy and stuff gets censored.
Did you actually bother to read my post? You're basically just spouting the same thing the person I was responding to said.
The problem is that you're falsely assuming it's all political because you're taking it as an attack on your own political beliefs rather than seeing it for what it is- these images have no political relevance, they are effectively a visual commentary of the person underneath. They get attacked and defended by the media based on who they are, not what their policies are- do you think p
It's Fox news, if it's really leftist propaganda then why the fuck is the most right wing news station in the US putting the exact same slant on it? Do you think Fox has been taken over by the left too now or something?
It might have something to do with the fact that it's not Fox News report—it's an Associated Press report; just look at the by-line. Foxnews.com, like most high-volume news websites, has most of its reporting done by third parties. I am just guessing but I would guess less than 10% of stories on Foxnews.com are written by actual Fox staffers.
P.S. And when you have learned to read by-lines, you might want to learn to read the news for bias—the only reason Fox News is "the most right wing news" ou
I agree it stinks, why is it racist when they turn Michell Obama into a monkey and not George Bush?
Oh, gosh, I think I can answer this one.
You might not have heard this, or have noticed, but Bush and Obama are members of different "races". A "race" is a social construct which (very) loosely groups people according to their geographical heritage, based on physical appearance. So -- again, you would have no reason to have noticed this -- Bush is a member of what is commonly called the "white" race; and Obama
So in other words, it's bad that I don't treat the races differently, and like you I should continue to uphold the prejudices towards different races and should continue to treat them differently?
I know it's hard for some people to think about such a thing on a different philosophical level than just ranting base on pure ignorant emotion, but please, at least try.
Think about it for a moment, you may realise that you're part the reason racism is a problem, because you inadvertently uphold the idea of having
The rest of us just need to realize that people like you don't know about things like "races" or "stereotypes", which actually is a very good thing, a harbinger of your progressive society.
So that's great. I hope in the future everybody can be like you. But for now, the rest of us are living on planet earth in 2009, where racism is a relatively minor (in the US at least) but still-serious problem. The rest of us don't think we can make racism disappear from the world by p
Perhaps it's because I don't live in the US, but really here in the UK we absolutely are at a point where political correctness is doing far more harm than good. In fact, the rise of the BNP (an extremely racist, far right political organisation) is gaining strength partly off the back of the idea that special treatment should be given to minority groups, because they are minority groups.
We reached a point where of course there was still racism, but for the most part it was dying out, we are a massively mul
True, true. I totally agree. It will take vigilance to prevent the pendulum from swinging back toward racism. (Good luck in the UK.) I'm not sure what your policies are like in the UK, but here in the US I think we should slowly back off of our racial policies (such as affirmative action) as racism withers -- and, we have done that, more or less. I think we are at a point in the US when we could back off a little more, and by the time I'm an old man we might be able to declare substantial victory over racis
"Most of us, when all is said and done, like what we like and make up reasons
for it afterwards."
-- Soren F. Petersen
Good Job guys (Score:5, Informative)
At the moment it suggests searching for "Michelle Obama monkey" when you search for "Michelle Obama"
Stupidity is not color-blind. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:5, Insightful)
The hypocrisy and faux outrage of the left wing in the US is more than a little disturbing and starting to become a little overwhelming to the point that it's truly starting to taint my view of the entire movement. It's not like they don't remember 18 months ago when they were still doing the *exact same things* to the bush admin as is being done here. Calling them Nazi's, the underlying racism against Rice and Powell, calling Powell a pet, token black, etc (until he changed to their "side" that is), the
Re:Stupidity is not color-blind. (Score:3, Insightful)
What has this got to do with the left wing?
Hypocrisy is using something like this, which is really bipartisan in treatment and trying to blame it on a particular political movement and then inferring from that that they are somehow the hypocrits.
The reason there was no uproar when it was done to Bush and Rice is because they were almost universally hated by the majority of the media at that point, whilst Michelle Obama has managed to maintain her place as a media darling just as many others have before her for some time.
Really, the reason people like Michelle Obama become media sweathearts nearly always has fuck all to do with her political stance and more to do with how she's been growing lettuce in the Whitehouse garden and what dresses she wears and other dumb shit like that.
I agree it stinks, why is it racist when they turn Michell Obama into a monkey and not George Bush? But blame media idiocy for creating Saint Michelle, partisan politics frankly has fuck all to do with it. It's little different to the media creating Saint Dianna after Princess Dianna died in a car crash despite the fact for months prior she'd been pointed out as a slut who had literally sworn at small children who ran up to her to get the chance to meet a real princess. If the media brings politics into it to defend their latest Saint then realise it for what it is- the media just using whatever it can to defend said Saint because it sells, don't stoop to their level of idiocy though and blame that whole political wing else you become the hypocrit.
To put it in another, more simplistic way, if this had been about a black actress, would you still have brought political leaning into it?
Re:Stupidity is not color-blind. (Score:4, Insightful)
What has this got to do with the left wing?
Here's the left wing bias: We never saw anything like this when Condolezza Rice was photoshopped (any of the numerous times). Another example is the "Joker Face" images. Do it to Obama and it's some sort of crazy Racist propaganda. Do it to Bush, and you get published in magazines for clever political satire. The bias is obviously there, since it seems any time it happens to the left, there's some huge controversy and stuff gets censored.
Re: (Score:2)
Did you actually bother to read my post? You're basically just spouting the same thing the person I was responding to said.
The problem is that you're falsely assuming it's all political because you're taking it as an attack on your own political beliefs rather than seeing it for what it is- these images have no political relevance, they are effectively a visual commentary of the person underneath. They get attacked and defended by the media based on who they are, not what their policies are- do you think p
Re: (Score:1)
Really, just look here:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,576786,00.html [foxnews.com]
It's Fox news, if it's really leftist propaganda then why the fuck is the most right wing news station in the US putting the exact same slant on it? Do you think Fox has been taken over by the left too now or something?
It might have something to do with the fact that it's not Fox News report—it's an Associated Press report; just look at the by-line. Foxnews.com, like most high-volume news websites, has most of its reporting done by third parties. I am just guessing but I would guess less than 10% of stories on Foxnews.com are written by actual Fox staffers.
P.S. And when you have learned to read by-lines, you might want to learn to read the news for bias—the only reason Fox News is "the most right wing news" ou
Re: (Score:2)
Goes to illustrate the fine line between satire and blasphemy ;)
Re: (Score:2)
I agree it stinks, why is it racist when they turn Michell Obama into a monkey and not George Bush?
Oh, gosh, I think I can answer this one.
You might not have heard this, or have noticed, but Bush and Obama are members of different "races". A "race" is a social construct which (very) loosely groups people according to their geographical heritage, based on physical appearance. So -- again, you would have no reason to have noticed this -- Bush is a member of what is commonly called the "white" race; and Obama
Re: (Score:2)
So in other words, it's bad that I don't treat the races differently, and like you I should continue to uphold the prejudices towards different races and should continue to treat them differently?
I know it's hard for some people to think about such a thing on a different philosophical level than just ranting base on pure ignorant emotion, but please, at least try.
Think about it for a moment, you may realise that you're part the reason racism is a problem, because you inadvertently uphold the idea of having
Re: (Score:2)
Right on brother! Here's what I said
The rest of us just need to realize that people like you don't know about things like "races" or "stereotypes", which actually is a very good thing, a harbinger of your progressive society.
So that's great. I hope in the future everybody can be like you. But for now, the rest of us are living on planet earth in 2009, where racism is a relatively minor (in the US at least) but still-serious problem. The rest of us don't think we can make racism disappear from the world by p
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps it's because I don't live in the US, but really here in the UK we absolutely are at a point where political correctness is doing far more harm than good. In fact, the rise of the BNP (an extremely racist, far right political organisation) is gaining strength partly off the back of the idea that special treatment should be given to minority groups, because they are minority groups.
We reached a point where of course there was still racism, but for the most part it was dying out, we are a massively mul
Re: (Score:2)
True, true. I totally agree. It will take vigilance to prevent the pendulum from swinging back toward racism. (Good luck in the UK.) I'm not sure what your policies are like in the UK, but here in the US I think we should slowly back off of our racial policies (such as affirmative action) as racism withers -- and, we have done that, more or less. I think we are at a point in the US when we could back off a little more, and by the time I'm an old man we might be able to declare substantial victory over racis