Al Sharpton Goes Ape Over NY Post Cartoon

[fuelair]

Nothing changes the point that Al Sharpton is still useless, trying to look important. Jesse Jackson at least USED to be useful.

 

[Cicero]

... Okaaay. Except that has nothing to do with what she wrote. She wrote about those darn uppity blacks and their appeasers. If you'll note, she even set up the "us" v "them" explicitly in her last sentence.

She wrote nothing about substantial issues like the racial gap in education, economic inequality, high crime rates, etc.

Nope, let's just whine about black people saying mean things that make us feel bad.

She wrote that it is tiresome to be lectured to by a minority, who is the U.S. Attorney General (not Bill Cosby), who works for the POTUS, also a minority, about how the races don't melt in the Caphalon, which of course they never have, and most likely, never will.

If you have some profound observations about education, economics, and crime as it pertains only to blacks, by all means, do share.

.

 

[Mumbles]

Well, Malkin has a lot of company in favor of FDR's decision to intern Japanese Americans after Pearl. Future Chief Justice, Earl Warren supported the action and the ACLU national office never challenged the internment. Could liberal icons such as FDR, Earl and the ACLU squeeze into your "loud and zealous" characterization?

Uh, yeah, so when FDR, Warren, or the avatar of the ACLU appear on some cable news network, give me a call.

So because she may be wrong about one thing, she is perforce wrong about everything else.

Whether she's right or wrong on some issue is beside the point. Like Sharpton, she's only right by accident (although she's done less good[and less harm] than Sharpton did). But in any case, her opinion is shaped towards partisans, and has nothing to do with reality. Which is why the Amos N' Andy stereotype of "Barack the Magic Negro" doesn't bother her, but she's somehow threatened by "My President is Black".

Okay, maybe she's really terrified by blue cars and rims, but I doubt it.

 

[BPSCG]

Whether she's right or wrong on some issue is beside the point.

Dodge noted.

 

[Cicero]

Uh, yeah, so when FDR, Warren, or the avatar of the ACLU appear on some cable news network, give me a call.

Right. FDR and Warren actually ordered the internment of the Japanese Americans, while the ACLU stood by in silence, but 60+ years later, Malkin is to blame for this chapter in U.S. history because she states over the airwaves that it was the correct decision at the time. Good to know your opinion of Malkin is in no way partisan.

BTW: Who has had more impact on U.S. society, FDR/Warren/ACLU or Malkin with her column and radio show?

 

[BPSCG]

Now Mayor Bloomberg is in trouble for not being outraged enough, or something...

At this morning’s City Hall rally, Councilwoman Letitia James called on black clergy members to block Michael Bloomberg from speaking to their congregations because of his lack of outrage over the controversial cartoon in the New York Post.

Bloomberg told reporters at a press conference ealier today that he accepted Murdoch’s apology at face value. Earlier, Bloomberg acknowledged that some people could be offended by the cartoon, but he didn’t seem perturbed by it.

 

[quixotecoyote]

I love that the artist has been so unapologetic and stopped just short of calling "idiot" on people who associated writing the stimulus with Obama instead of Pelosi and Congress.

My best hope out of this is for a cartoon (ideally in the Post) of Sharpton and James visiting a monkey cage at a zoo while pointing fingers at a befuddled zookeeper and screaming "RACISM!!".

eta:Times like this I wish I could draw.

 

[Mumbles]

Dodge noted.

Let's try again. This time, please respond to my actual argument.


Michelle Malkin is not a useful person to quote in any sort of discussion, because she thoughtlessly sticks to talking points instead of dealing with reality. Even when she's right, it's usually for the wrong reasons.

I think it's fine for white people to ask what what Obama thinks of Wright's racial opinions. Actually, I think that's a good idea, since it will help them to understand black communities around the US. However, I don't think it's right to just jump to the conclusion that he said nothing while Wright ranted about how awful whites are week after week, when nobody has actually turned up evidence that Wright hates white people, or that he ranted about white people in every sermon.

Malkin's assertion that "My President is Black" is a racist song is stupid. The song makes no disparaging remarks towards any race - with then possible exception of "the N word". The truth is, the song is a clumsy attempt at pride by a former drug dealer, and that's it. Malkin completely misses the point, and the problem, with this song.

The idea that everyone just caves to Al Sharpton is, again, stupid. That guy's always talking about something, and most of the time, nobody cares. Even on this controversy, I've heard a lot of people point out that, as much as he protests against the Post, he's a regular on Fox News. The truth is, while he sometimes has intelligent things to say, he's a pundit first, an NYC activist second, and a "black leader" never.

And the guys who enabled "pc thugs" to call things like "That One" and "Thug Thizzle" racist? What, is she angry at Youtube or something? What's her point? Yet again, this point is stupid.

And the idea that Holder wants people like her to sit down and shut up? That's...actually, a good idea for Malkin, given her record. But it's not really accurate - or rather, I have no reason to believe it. One of the most obvious points that people like her refuse to realize is that Holder was talking about *everyone* in the US, and not just whites, or conservatives, or whoever.

 

[UnrepentantSinner]

Being Filipino, what could Malkin possibly know about racism?

She certainly appears to be utterly ignorant of what irony is:

In a 2003 Jewish World Review column[39] about Yaser Esam Hamdi, she questioned "whether Hamdi should even be considered an American at all" and argued that the legal doctrine of birthright citizenship, which grants automatic U.S. citizenship to "anchor babies" (a term for children born in the U.S. to non-citizens), "undermines the integrity of citizenship—not to mention national security".

Malkin was born Michelle Maglalang on October 20, 1970 in Philadelphia to Filipino parents, Rafaela and Dr. Apolo Maglalang, while they were in the United States on student visas.[3]

 

[Cicero]

She certainly appears to be utterly ignorant of what irony is:

Burned by wiki, again.

MALKIN: "My dad came on a -- he was -- like I said, he was a doctor, so he was training here and had an employer sponsor and then -- you know, and then, you know, went on their way, like most people do who have green cards, and then eventual American citizenship."

LAMB: "You said that your parents became citizens in `89. When did they come to the United States?"


MALKIN: "In 1970."

"I often talk about how I myself am the child of legal immigrants who came here from the Philippines. And one of the themes that I`ve always talked about is something that they`ve reminded me of almost every day since I was old enough to understand it, which is that entry into this country and residence in this country, and ultimately, citizenship in this country is an absolute privilege, and it ought not to be treated as some sort of natural right or entitlement."


http://www.booknotes.org/Transcript/?ProgramID=1705

"Hamdi was born in East Baton Rouge, Louisiana, on September 26, 1980. His parents were both citizens of Saudi Arabia. Hamdi's father was here on a temporary work assignment as a chemical engineer for the Saudi Arabia Basic Industries Corp., a Saudi government-controlled industrial giant. When Hamdi was three, his family went back to Saudi Arabia.

For the next two decades, Hamdi was raised in the Saudi kingdom. He spoke their language, not ours. He went to their schools, not ours. He embraced their culture, their religion, and their way of life. Not ours."

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/michelle/malkin070403.asp

 

[UnrepentantSinner]

Burned by wiki, again.

You really have an amazing capacity to miss things. She's been screaming about anchor babies being deported and yet, as she admits in the Booknotes interview - precisely where you quoted her - that she's exactly the sort of anchor baby she's screaming to have deported.

 

[Cicero]

You really have an amazing capacity to miss things. She's been screaming about anchor babies being deported and yet, as she admits in the Booknotes interview - precisely where you quoted her - that she's exactly the sort of anchor baby she's screaming to have deported.

First off, Malkin's parents were not in the U.S. on "student visas." What student visa is good for 19 years?

Deporting anchor babies? Where does she say that? Malkin is against children of illegal aliens born in the U.S. being given automatic citizenship. How would you deport a baby?

Malkin's parents were in the U.S. legally and eventually became American citizens. How could Malkin have been an anchor baby? Did Malkin's parents stick the taxpayers for the hospitalization costs for her birth?

The fact that you do not recognize the obvious differences between the Malkin's and the Hamdi's is precisely the problem with U.S. immigration and naturalization laws.

 

[Dr Adequate]

Wouldn't a courageous Barack Obama have confronted Jeremiah Wright's racism head-on instead of listening to it for twenty years? You don't think Malkin has a good point there?

Can you quote some of the racist things Wright said?

 

[Cicero]

Can you quote some of the racist things Wright said?

Wright is into woo.

"The government lied about Pearl Harbor. They knew the Japanese were going to attack."


"If they don't find weapons of mass destruction, they will do like the LAPD and plant them, some weapons of mass destruction."

Wright believes he can use racist terms with impunity.

"Who for 20 years causes some white people and some Uncle Toms some problems.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jc2FCJ7zWEQ&feature=related

"Hillary ain't never been called a ******."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VUbUBTlmAiA
2:39

Why did Obama throw Wright under the Greyhound if Wright never made any comments that could be construed as racist?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JicZeBkg67A&feature=related

 

[Dr Adequate]

Wright is into woo.

"The government lied about Pearl Harbor. They knew the Japanese were going to attack."


"If they don't find weapons of mass destruction, they will do like the LAPD and plant them, some weapons of mass destruction."

Wright believes he can use racist terms with impunity.

"Who for 20 years causes some white people and some Uncle Toms some problems.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jc2FCJ7zWEQ&feature=related

"Hillary ain't never been called a ******."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VUbUBTlmAiA
2:39

I'll take that as a no, then.

"Uncle Tom" is a racist term now? Or is it the phrase "white people" you object to?

Why did Obama throw Wright under the Greyhound if Wright never made any comments that could be construed as racist?

That's a pretty big logic fail even for you.

Because it's possible to say dumb things that are not racist. You know, like Reverend Wright did.

 

[Cicero]

I'll take that as a no, then.

"Uncle Tom" is a racist term now? Or is it the phrase "white people" you object to?

That's a pretty big logic fail even for you.

Because it's possible to say dumb things that are not racist. You know, like Reverend Wright did.

You mean ****** is no longer a racist term either? OK. I wonder why Obama made mention of Farrakhan in this comment about Wright?

"[W]hen he states and then amplifies such ridiculous propositions as the U.S. government somehow being involved in AIDS, when he suggests that Minister Farrakhan somehow represents one of the greatest voices of the 20th and 21st century, when he equates the United States wartime efforts with terrorism, then there are no excuses. They offend me. They rightly offend all Americans. And they should be denounced. And that's what I'm doing very clearly and unequivocally here today." Obama

I imagine Obama believes Farrakhan is known for antisemitic comments or why would he include his name while rebuking Wright for his views and his support of Farrakhan? Or does antisemitism not count in your concept of bigotry? Or is it also impossible for a black to make racist comments?

Obama is the one who has listened to Wright for 20 years. Maybe he has been privy to Wright's history of racist/antisemitic/bigoted comments that were not captured on video?

But good to know that you defend the PT Barnum/Father Coughlin of the Trinity Church.

 

[Dr Adequate]

You mean ****** is no longer a racist term either?

Ever hear of the use-mention distinction? You just used the word ******.

Saying: ""Hillary ain't never been called a ******" is not racist. For one thing, it's true.

Are you trying to suggest that employing the word in that way proves that Wright is prejudiced against black people?

Sophistry should me more ... sophisticated.

OK. I wonder why Obama made mention of Farrakhan in this comment about Wright?

Because, as you can see by reading Obama's statement, Wright "suggested that Minister Farrakhan somehow represents one of the greatest voices of the 20th and 21st century", a proposition that Obama apparently finds ridiculous.

I imagine Obama believes Farrakhan is known for antisemitic comments or why would he include his name while rebuking Wright for his views and his support of Farrakhan? Or does antisemitism not count in your concept of bigotry? Or is it also impossible for a black to make racist comments?

It is. It is also possible for "a black" not to make racist comments, even if you want him to have done so very very much.

Obama is the one who has listened to Wright for 20 years. Maybe he has been privy to Wright's history of racist/antisemitic/bigoted comments that were not captured on video?

Or maybe this is a wish-fulfillment fantasy with no substantiating evidence.

But good to know that you defend the PT Barnum/Father Coughlin of the Trinity Church.

I will defend anyone against false allegations; and no-one against true ones.

 

[Merko]

Wouldn't a courageous Barack Obama have confronted Jeremiah Wright's racism head-on instead of listening to it for twenty years?

I would also want to know what racism you're talking about? As for his divisiveness, his sometimes overly harsh criticism of the US (though I must say, hasn't somebody who served in the army earned a certain right to, at times, be a bit overly critical of his/her country?), and the various conspiracy theories he supports, it certainly seems to me that Obama has spoken quite clearly in the opposite direction. I never understood the demand for him to leave. Surely it must have been much better for his congregation if they got to hear from Obama as well as from Wright.

It seems some people want to link Obama with racism because Obama had a pastor (Wright) who has spoken approvingly of Farrakhan (for reasons having nothing to do with racism) who in turn has been unable or unwilling to take on racism within his wackjob religion (I haven't been able to find anything said directly by Farrakhan that is racist, although plenty that is just insane).

 

[Merko]

As others pointed out, 1 monkey, given time, coud also write the works of Shakespeare, but for some reason the reference is usually to 1000 monkeys.

That's because it's unlikely that monkey's hammering away at typewriters will end up with a masterpiece. But I still find this reference implausible.
So, they are shooting 1 monkey, saying "They'll have to find someone else to write the next stimulus bill."

Now, there are at least two problems in trying to make this a reference to the '1000 monkeys' saying. First, although it's often 1000 monkeys, it's always lots of monkeys. Sometimes they are 1000, sometimes 'an army', sometimes a million, sometimes they are infinite in numbers. Either way, shooting one single monkey would definitely not mean that 'they' would have to find a replacement.

The second problem lies with what the army of monkeys is writing: a masterpiece. So unless the point of the cartoonist is that the stimulus bill is a masterpiece, it doesn't make any sense at all.

The stimulus bill was a whole bunch of random, disconnected, spending items thrown together haphazardly, as if by a chimp with a typewriter.

I think that reference would have been plausible if the officers in the cartoon had been saying 'There goes 1/1000 of the stimulus bill!' or something like that.

(incidentally, the stimulus bill might very well be a whole bunch of random, disconnected, spending items thrown together haphazardly, and that wouldn't really be problem with a stimulus bill, but that's another matter!)

 

[Peephole]

http://www.inselpix.com/img/25605943570.jpg
http://www.inselpix.com/img/250027186416.jpg
http://www.inselpix.com/img/217558649151.jpg

It's pretty obvious to anyone with half a brain cell that Sean Delonas is a bigotted ****.

Please do not circumvent the autocensor.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Tricky