I can buy the idea that the original intent of this idea was to simply mock the stimulus bill and that the guy who drew it didn't intend for it to be a thinly veiled racist statement. But how many people saw this thing before it hit the fucking paper? Because when I say that it's a "thinly veiled" statement, that's the understatement of the year. Is there no one in the editing room at the Post who was thinking about this offending people?
And I have to admit, the intent of this cartoon was originally lost on me. I had to think for a moment why someone was shooting monkeys in the street before remembering about the chimp that went crazy. For me that made it simply a racist type statement with absolutely no irony whatsoever. What bothers me most is that this just lends another forum to Al Sharpton to get up and grandstand with his bad hair weave.
Here's an apology from Rupert himself printed in the Post yesterday:
As the Chairman of the New York Post, I am ultimately responsible for what is printed in its pages. The buck stops with me.
Last week, we made a mistake. We ran a cartoon that offended many people. Today I want to personally apologize to any reader who felt offended, and even insulted.
Over the past couple of days, I have spoken to a number of people and I now better understand the hurt this cartoon has caused. At the same time, I have had conversations with Post editors about the situation and I can assure you - without a doubt - that the only intent of that cartoon was to mock a badly written piece of legislation. It was not meant to be racist, but unfortunately, it was interpreted by many as such.
We all hold the readers of the New York Post in high regard and I promise you that we will seek to be more attuned to the sensitivities of our community.
The notion that the Post holds its readers in high regard is pretty funny to me. And why did it take a couple of days of discussion to understand why this might offend people? And I like how the apology still mocks the legislation, thus implicitly endorsing the cartoon.
George Wallace was a segregationist, racist, and a bigot for much of his life. (At least until he wasn't). His daughter, apparently, is not. Of all the reflections I have read on the events of the past 24 hours, I think this composition is the most compelling. Ms. Wallace Kennedy observes that:
And now a new call to arms has sounded as Americans face another assault on freedom. For if the stand in the schoolhouse door was a defining moment for George Wallace, then surely the aftermath of Katrina and the invasion of Iraq will be the same for George W. Bush. The trampling of individual freedoms and his blatant contempt for the rights of the average American may not have been as obvious as an ax-handle-wielding governor, but Bush's insidiousness and piety have made him much more dangerous.
And concludes that:
Today, Barack Obama is hope for a better tomorrow for all Americans. He stands on the shoulders of all those people who have incessantly prayed for a day when "justice will run down like waters and righteousness as a mighty stream" (Amos 5:24). [. . .] And today, the day after the election, I am going to ride to the cemetery so that if asked, I can vouch for the fact that the world is still spinning but my father lies at peace.
Here's what Don Imus said yesterday while talking to Warner Wolf about Adam "Pacman" Jones.
"He's been arrested six times since being drafted by Tennessee in 2005," Wolf said. "What color is he?" Imus asked. "He's African-American," Wolf responded. "Well, there you go," Imus said. "Now we know."
Side Bar is going to tell us that he believes his explanation/apology, which is that he meant to imply that cops like to arrest black people (though not many other NFL players have been arrested 6 times in the last 3 years), and not that black people like to get themselves arrested.
I don't really care if Imus is a racist or not, I just wish he would keep his fucking mouth shut so we don't have to hear from Al Sharpton.
I think the 10 of you who read this blog were probably in the room at Side Bar's house during the discussion of this IO digital cable commercial, but I still don't get it. Here, watch it:
Who in the world thought of this commercial and what the hell were they smoking? I can just imagine some like 38 year old white dude who went to Cornell sitting in his cubicle on Madison Avenue thinking, "I know. The Latino market is gonna be the next big thing. That reggaeton thing is really popular. Lord knows that me gusta la gasolina. Why don't we make a commercial that speaks directly to the Latinos who are really the ones that want digital cable with free HD."
I just don't get it? Why is this a good idea? I mean, if the purpose of it was just to get people talking about hte commercial and then ultimately thinking about getting digital cable, then I guess it worked. I have had at least 4 or 5 conversations about this commercial. But why the fuck is this a reggaeton song? And why is it addressed to "mi gente", as if latinos are the only ones who can listen or think about getting digital cable with free HD? And why does he say "twenty nine ninety fye" instead of "five"? And why the fuck is that guy dressed like a sea creature about 50 seconds in?
This is just an existential conundrum. I have to know who conceived of this commercial and why? It's almost like the time that Jamie Lynn Sigler put out an album with some of the songs in Spanish because her mother is Cuban, even though she's Jewish and from Long Island. (I'm not trying to rob Jamie Lynn Sigler of her Cuban heritage, but I don't think the term "Latin Explosion" really should have applied to you, Meadow. How about that switch from third to second person?)
The point is, what the fuck is up with this commercial?
Rev. Al Sharpton called on former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney to "engage in a dialogue of reconciliation" Thursday, a day after the two exchanged a war of words over Sharpton's comments about the Mormon faith.
"I have a profound respect for all believers of God, regardless of whether they are theologically in step with my beliefs or not, and I unequivocally say to the Mormons or anyone else that I in no way want to directly or indirectly be a part of any intolerance between any religions or races and regret my words being used or misused in any fashion that would add to that," Sharpton said in a statement.
Sharpton told his radio-show audience Thursday he personally called Romney, but Rachel Noerdlinger, a spokeswoman for Sharpton, told CNN the two did not speak.
In a radio debate Tuesday night, Sharpton said "those who really believe in God will defeat" Romney for the White House. Sharpton later said he was not questioning Romney's Mormon faith but instead was aiming his comments toward Christopher Hitchens, the author he was debating.
On Wednesday, Romney called the comment "bigoted," and said "it was a most unfortunate comment to make."
Say what you will about Al "do as I say not as I do" Sharpton but the man has balls.
Al Sharpton just got someone fired because of an intolerant comment and now he wants a pass? Give me a break. He should lose his radio show and any standing of respect that he has (for some reason) in society.
This wasn't even said in jest.
Big-Got Al has a history of making intolerant and irresponsible statements, isn't it time that we stopped him? News media - can't you please PLEASE make this a big story and wipe this guy off the map?
In a debate earlier this week, Al Sharpton had this to say of Mitt Romney, "As for the one Mormon running for office, those who really believe in God will defeat him anyways, so don’t worry about that; that’s a temporary situation".
Nice.
He's going to get away with it, too, because, unlike Imus he's not going to try to accept responsibility for what he did. Instead, he's just denying it. "“What I said was that we would defeat him, meaning as a Republican,” Sharpton said. “A Mormon, by definition, believes in God. They don’t believe in God the way I do, but by definition, they believe in God.” He also added he was trying to contrast himself with the atheist he was debating.
With the uproar over Don Imus, especially by Reverends Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, both of whom refuse to accept his apology and demand his firing, I thought it may be interesting to see if these two stone-casters were without sin. After all, they realize how powerful words are and would never throw them around irresponsibly, right???
"White folks was in caves while we was building empires... We taught philosophy and astrology and mathematics before Socrates and them Greek homos ever got around to it." -- Rev. Al Sharpton in a 1994 speech at Kean College, NJ, cited in "Democrats Do the Dumbest Things
1987: Sharpton spreads the incendiary Tawana Brawley hoax, insisting heatedly that a 15-year-old black girl was abducted, raped, and smeared with feces by a group of white men. He singles out Steve Pagones, a young prosecutor. Pagones is wholly innocent -- the crime never occurred -- but Sharpton taunts him: "If we're lying, sue us, so we can . . . prove you did it." Pagones does sue, and eventually wins a $345,000 verdict for defamation. To this day, Sharpton refuses to recant his unspeakable slander or to apologize for his role in the odious affair.
1991: A Hasidic Jewish driver in Brooklyn's Crown Heights section accidentally kills Gavin Cato, a 7-year-old black child, and antisemitic riots erupt. Sharpton races to pour gasoline on the fire. At Gavin's funeral he rails against the "diamond merchants" -- code for Jews -- with "the blood of innocent babies" on their hands. He mobilizes hundreds of demonstrators to march through the Jewish neighborhood, chanting, "No justice, no peace." A rabbinical student, Yankel Rosenbaum, is surrounded by a mob shouting "Kill the Jews!" and stabbed to death.
1995: When the United House of Prayer, a large black landlord in Harlem, raises the rent on Freddy's Fashion Mart, Freddy's white Jewish owner is forced to raise the rent on his subtenant, a black-owned music store. A landlord-tenant dispute ensues; Sharpton uses it to incite racial hatred. "We will not stand by," he warns malignantly, "and allow them to move this brother so that some white interloper can expand his business." Sharpton's National Action Network sets up picket lines; customers going into Freddy's are spat on and cursed as "traitors" and "Uncle Toms." Some protesters shout, "Burn down the Jew store!" and simulate striking a match. "We're going to see that this cracker suffers," says Sharpton's colleague Morris Powell. On Dec. 8, one of the protesters bursts into Freddy's, shoots four employees point-blank, then sets the store on fire. Seven employees die in the inferno.
Jesse Jackson, according to Wikipedia has had some less than flattering comments about those Old-Testament Readers, himself: Rev. Jackson has remarked "that he was "sick and tired of hearing about the Holocaust"; that there are "very few Jewish reporters that have the capacity to be objective about Arab affairs"; In addition Rev. Jackson had referred to Jews as "Hymies" and to New York City as "Hymietown" in January 1984 during a conversation with Washington Post reporter, Milton Coleman."
First of all, Don Imus had a long history of this type of racist behavior. This is not an isolated incident, and We don't need apologists explainig why he should still be on the air. In case you missed it, Donny called the Rutgers women's basketball team "nappy headed hos" and later someone else called the "jigaboos". How does this not warrant his firing? Also I'm not sure what that piece is at the end where a guy who I think is Billy Packer says that Charlie Rose is "fagging out" on him.
How is it that Imus has any credibility? His history is that he was a DJ with a cocaine addiction and a penchant for not only saying racist things, but actually treating people who worked for him and near him in a disgusting way. Why is it that politicians give him the time of day? Just because he chooses to speak about politics makes him a political outlet? Fuck that then. Wheeere's Luke is now an important political outlet. I want motherfuckers fighting for our endorsement. It's not as if he has any listeners. I don't see why clowns go on his show.
Anyway, this apology he issued is really half assed:
“[I want to] apologize for an insensitive and ill-conceived remark we made the other morning referring to the Rutgers women’s basketball team. It was completely inappropriate, and we can understand why people were offended. Our characterization was thoughtless and stupid, and we are sorry.”
Who is "we", Donny? Unless you are Smeagol and you're searching Middle Earth for your Precious, then you don't refer to yourself as "we". Apologize for your own actions and take some fucking responsibility. I don't think apologies work that way. It doesn't excuse you from whatever intolerances you're espousing. I know that most people don't even know who Imus is, and that's why they don't care, but I'm surprised that there isn't more of an uproar over this.
