Murdoch Apologizes for Non-Racist Cartoon
Rupert Murdoch legitimizes Al Sharpton’s nonsense:
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.
Next time maybe they’ll apologize pre-emptively, as the Washington Post did for this illustration:
Michelle Malkin explains that this was “an illustration accompanying a humor column by Gene Weingarten titled ‘Monkey Business’ about a study that reported on how women were aroused at the sight of bonobo apes mating.”
Racists.
Yeah, we’re a nation of cowards all right. But it’s not because we’re not talking about race enough.
Wacists!
Dmac (49b16c) — 2/24/2009 @ 7:05 amMy “apology” would have taken a decidedly different tack …
Last week, we made a mistake. We ran a cartoon that mocked that farsical legislation otherwise known as the stimulus package. Today I want to personally apologize to any reader who felt offended. I personally apologize for your lack of education, your inability to know the difference between who signs a bill and who writes a bill, and your overall pig-headed ignorance.
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. I understand that there are those amongst us, the perpetually outraged, the race-baiters, and the misery pimps, that will use anything to advance their cause, even when their claims do not stand up to basic scrutiny. 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. And we all know, interpretation and bastardization of language is a standard practice for the professional victim class.
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. In the future, we will get prior approval from the race-hustlers before running a news article, cartoon, or editorial. We realize that this will be a fruitless endeavor, because those that were offended by a cartoon comparing Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid to a Xanax-eating wine-drinking chimp are going to find some reason for outrage no matter how hard we try.
Good day, sirs.
JD (ad7346) — 2/24/2009 @ 7:31 amRecall if you will the part Al Sharpton played in the Tawana Brawley incident (details at Wikipedia). She accused several white men of rape, one was Assistant DA Steven Pagones of Dutchess County NY. She said he was a racist as well as a rapist. I don’t think Sharpton has apologized yet.
Ropelight (e36d4f) — 2/24/2009 @ 7:33 amYou are 100% correct about Sharpton. And it’s worse that that: he uses racism to shake people down for money, while there is genuine racism to be deal with (on all sides).
But Sharpton is about Sharpton. Nothing else, sadly.
Tom Wolfe wrote about this kind of thing a long time ago in “Radical Chic and Mau-Mauing the Flack Catchers.”
I’m alternately saddened and angered by this topic.
Eric Blair (9671e0) — 2/24/2009 @ 7:38 amOr, paid the damages he was assessed in the libel trial he lost.
AD - RtR/OS (8de25e) — 2/24/2009 @ 7:38 amI apologize that you are too ignorant to breathe without cue cards. I apologize that you insist on creating racial situations where none exist. I apologize that you are so bone-jarringly stoooopid that you do not know who wrote the first stimulus bill. I apologize that your life is obviously so difficult. I apologize that you not only misunderstood me, but are incapable of ever understanding.
JD (ad7346) — 2/24/2009 @ 7:54 amFuckin’ racists
JD (ad7346) — 2/24/2009 @ 7:54 amIt’s always interesting to me to see how the definition of “apology” appears to differ from person to person.
Eric Blair (9671e0) — 2/24/2009 @ 7:57 amThe New York Daily News, the Post’s closest compeditor, had an editorial yesterday suggesting that the cartoonist and the editor responsible be fired.
In today’s Daily News,February 24, 2009, there is a cartoon on page 31 of the Queens edition, entitled Argyle Sweater, in which a black-furred chimp is being dunked into a large bowl of salsa by a lion.
In the foreground, a crocodile waiter is asking two crocodile customers if they want the chimp with salsa appetizer.
I am waiting to see how long it will be before the “usual suspects” – Al Sharpton, Jessie Jackson, Benjamin Jealous, Julian Bond and the other left-minded activists call for a boycott of the Daily News.
After all, the cartoon certainly is meant to be President Obama and, not only is the Daily News avocating his assassination, but, also, his ingestion.
Longwalker (4e0dda) — 2/24/2009 @ 8:00 amI think that a Xanax eating wine drinking chimp could have done a better job writing this apology.
JD (ad7346) — 2/24/2009 @ 8:02 amRupert Murdoch is an evil man with far too much control on our media. Please boycott his papers and other media stations and tell those that advertise on his networks that you will no longer support them if they continue to give their advertising dollars to those media outlets.
It is time to change the way we do business in this country and we shouldn’t accept his lame apology.
Everything Matters
Everything Matters (d0eb05) — 2/24/2009 @ 8:06 amhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xy6uVvM4iF8
I apologize for everyone having to read Everything Matters’ comment. Thank you. We are all dummerer for having done so.
JD (ad7346) — 2/24/2009 @ 8:09 amIs Murdoch too old to play Gail Wynand in the remake of The Fountainhead?
Also, if the WaPo legitimizes a racist interpretation of its monkey cartoon by pre-emptively apologizing to those stupid enough to interpret it as referring to blacks, I demand an apology to us Caucasians, as well. Under the Post’s version, white women are clearly portrayed as sexual obsessives craving that “monkey love”, IYKWIMAITYD, while sad little white men shamefully attempt to cover their inadequate genitalia, as represented by the bouquet of droopy flowers.
Where’s Eric Holder when you need him. Is the nation’s too lawyer too busy to bring these racial cowards to account?
(If you are offended, pretend I have pre-emptively apologized, myself. I would actually apologize, but you know how lazy we southern Italians can be.)
fat tony (dd5eeb) — 2/24/2009 @ 8:17 amI apologize for sharing the same phylum as Everything Matters. I can’t apologize for sharing the same order yet as I’m not entirely certain I do.
John Hitchcock (fb941d) — 2/24/2009 @ 8:22 amWe aren’t even the same Domain as that person, John. No worries.
Eric Blair (9671e0) — 2/24/2009 @ 8:24 amHey, wasn’t Argyle the (black) limo driver from Die Hard? And doesn’t Argyle sound a little like Urkel (also black)? And haven’t you conservative neocons repeatedly denigrated our Dear Leader by comparing him to Urkel? Reparations!
(One thing I’m not clear about: Do you mean to call attention to Obama’s blackness when you deNIGRAte him, or or you emasculating him by de-nigrate-ing him? Either way, RethuKKKlicans are evil.)
fat tony (83f355) — 2/24/2009 @ 8:33 amOne might temper their indignation concerning this corporate capitulation with the understanding that this was just the cost of doing business in this political and litigation obsessed culture. I have only a guess on the true decision rationale, but I’d offer that this was very likely based on the comparison of indeterminate legal costs versus this short and blatantly robotic apology. It will be swallowed up by other news within hours. Otherwise, it would have become fodder for weeks on the evening news, NYT et al, and the periodicals, notwithstanding the cabal of law firms jostling for position.
The purpose of business is to survive and create revenues in excess of expenses. Here is a legal expense being contained. Minor point…does anyone really believe any of the legal tools have any political or racial interest from their ‘business’ viewpoint? Sharpton’s business is shaking down deep pocket suits. So the overarching theme here is ‘this is just business as usual’. From a business perspective, these are everyday obstacles to profits. I’d say Murdoch was just practicing ‘safe’ business. And further, if it were possible to win a judgment that resulted in a monetary flow to Murdoch, he’d have included that into the considerations. Quit laughing…
Politics only pay the bills when you are a politician, or have them in your pocket. Which applies to all participants, to be sure.
allan (7916a6) — 2/24/2009 @ 8:36 amI’m picturing Everything Matters writing his screed with the required 45 – degree angle sympathetic held – tilt. Nice job, Emo Boy/Girl/It.
Dmac (49b16c) — 2/24/2009 @ 8:36 amallan – Problem with that thought process is that by the mere act of apologizing, even if not sincere, is that the MSM and the Left will file this away as a documented example of Rupert Murdoch being a racist.
fat tony – While I agree with your overall point, I do not agree with the intentionally inflammatory manner in which it is presented.
JD (ad7346) — 2/24/2009 @ 8:39 amOkay, I laughed out loud at that. Now the dog is scared.
Stashiu3 (460dc1) — 2/24/2009 @ 8:40 am😉
Stash normally only scares the sheep.
JD (ad7346) — 2/24/2009 @ 8:42 amNo, sheep scare me. I mean… umm… not sure that came out the way… dammit JD!!
Stashiu3 (460dc1) — 2/24/2009 @ 8:44 amThat was baaaaaaaad.
John Hitchcock (fb941d) — 2/24/2009 @ 8:46 amJD- I’m not sure if you are kidding. I had hoped for a “Racist!” from you, so maybe I did go over the top, especially with the second comment. If you are serious, let me offer a sincere apology (as opposed to the sorry-if-you-were-offended kind.) I’m just screwing around, not trying to turn this place into Stormfront.
fat tony (83f355) — 2/24/2009 @ 8:47 amlol
FWIW, and Dmac has pointed out repeatedly, freeballin’ in a kilt is the easiest way to sneak up on the sheep without spooking them.
JD (ad7346) — 2/24/2009 @ 8:47 amsheep-f***erist!
fat tony (83f355) — 2/24/2009 @ 8:48 amfat tony – It takes far more than that to offend me. I just thought it was a bit gratutitous. That point is made quite fine without putting all caps on the letters, which is the equivalent of putting a flashing arrow sign on your comment. The point was good without that.
Now, carry on, RACISTS
JD (ad7346) — 2/24/2009 @ 8:49 amDmac read your manifesto? Explains a lot.
Stashiu3 (460dc1) — 2/24/2009 @ 8:50 amJD, who was that we started the “racist” thing with? I think it was Phil or peter during one of the illegal-immigration threads, wasn’t it?
Stashiu3 (460dc1) — 2/24/2009 @ 8:52 amJD-thanks. FWIW, I was trying to channel my inner KosKid, spelling things out for you !1!!!FASCIST!!1! simpletons. I was trying to characterize one type of jackass, but see why I might have come across as another.
fat tony (83f355) — 2/24/2009 @ 8:55 amStash – It was Phil, yes. Any desire to enforce the existing laws was prima facie evidence of our inherent racism, a meme that Hacks has run with round here as well.
fat tony – I got it. I just do not think that we should give any potential ammo to the douchebags that reflexively come around here looking for reasons to call us racists. I mean, bob judson while talking about a completely unrelated subject, told us how the Republicans would bring back slavery, or something to that effect.
At the same time, my natural instinct it to tell asshats like that to go attempt to cornhole a salwater croc.
This apology goes to the heart of intentionalism, privileging the recipients interpretation over that of the author, which is such a fuckin’ travesty so as to not require any further discussion.
But, if that is the way the game is bein played, we should feel free to re-interpret anything and everything stated by Baracky, his supporters, SanFanNan, Harry Reid, etc … as our interpretation is more important that what was actually said.
JD (ad7346) — 2/24/2009 @ 9:03 amDmac read your manifesto? Explains a lot.
I’m actually at about the midway point – looking forward to future chapters “Picking up Hot Chicks Through the Usage of Che’ T – Shirts and Throwing Rocks Together at the Local Starbucks,” and “How to Please Your Menstrual Rights Faux Angry Girlfriend via the Making of Hot Dissident Monkey Love.” Should be an instuctional read, methinks.
Dmac (49b16c) — 2/24/2009 @ 9:03 amFWIW, this rant about apologies, PC nonsense, etc … was linked at PW a couple weeks ago. It is epic.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/this-britain/its-pc-gone-mad-how-did-taking-offence-become-a-national-obsession-1607060.html
JD (ad7346) — 2/24/2009 @ 9:04 amTo me, the dead chimp cartoon is on a par with the “lipstick on a pig” comment by Obama. You should know that in the context of the times some people are going to see it differently than it was intended. Saying those people are stupid doesn’t help much.
Peccator Dubius (0a6237) — 2/24/2009 @ 9:05 amPeccator – So, should every statement be viewed in the light of who will intentionally misrepresent my intention when you say something?
JD (ad7346) — 2/24/2009 @ 9:09 amOh, what the heck. I’ll bite: How was the “lipstick on a pig” comment intended? Spefically, who or what was the lipstick, and who/what the pig?
fat tony (83f355) — 2/24/2009 @ 9:09 amWhat did you think of, “Disguises for shopping at Wal-Mart to avoid losing your Progressive-cred?” My personal favorite (I thought the Boy George suggestion a bit over-the-top, but the rest were totally believable).
Stashiu3 (460dc1) — 2/24/2009 @ 9:09 amYikes! “specifically”
fat tony (83f355) — 2/24/2009 @ 9:15 amSome racial dialogue we’re having. Over the last few days, we’ve had numerous talking heads on national TV telling us that cartoons of apes are actually about black people.
That’s PROGRESS, people.
Techie (6b5d8d) — 2/24/2009 @ 9:22 amTechie – Apparently, once you are enlightened, a holder of the received wisdom, when you see a chimp, you think of black people.
JD (ad7346) — 2/24/2009 @ 9:25 amConservative blogs, like Patterico, are the Jane Goodalls of current American chimpansese culture.
And while I do not get sexually arosed by Bonobo mating films, I do admit as a kid I thought Kim Hunter a hotie in Planet of the Apes. Yeah I dug Nova too.
Joe (dcebbd) — 2/24/2009 @ 9:26 amWhat did you think of, “Disguises for shopping at Wal-Mart to avoid losing your Progressive-cred?”
I found it quite interesting, particularly when they discussed the Bitter Gun/Religiony Clingers outfit, replete with 12 – gauge shotgun and Gideon’s Bible. The Klansman Hat was offered as a suggested accessory only.
Dmac (49b16c) — 2/24/2009 @ 9:27 amChimpanzee. My bad.
Joe (dcebbd) — 2/24/2009 @ 9:27 amAnother option was to dress as the Angel Moroni.
Dmac (49b16c) — 2/24/2009 @ 9:28 amDmac – Did they sell the starched bedsheets and pillowcases?
JD (ad7346) — 2/24/2009 @ 9:29 amWhen I went to the Honolulu Zoo and saw all those monkee/ape-type animals, that’s the first thing I thought of. Yup, that thing reminds me of black people, uh huh.
I did like the pictogram sign of a lion peeing on a human, though. I wonder what that meant.
John Hitchcock (fb941d) — 2/24/2009 @ 9:29 amPeccator: Steve Verdon rules apply here.
fat tony (83f355) — 2/24/2009 @ 9:30 amThis isn’t the national conversation on race baiting that Holder is afraid to have. After all, he doesn’t want to put Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and Julian Bond out of business.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 2/24/2009 @ 9:31 amFeel free to reinterpret Peccator’s comments however you wish. Your interpretation is more privileged than his intent.
JD (ad7346) — 2/24/2009 @ 9:32 amJohn: I think it meant you have issues. 😉
fat tony (83f355) — 2/24/2009 @ 9:32 amdaleyrocks – He does not even want to have a full conversation on race. Only those viewpoints that already agree with him are invited in his courageous world.
JD (ad7346) — 2/24/2009 @ 9:33 amDid they sell the starched bedsheets and pillowcases?
No, they sold an over – the – counter treatment to get them the appropriate color of Pearly White (called KKKolor – White); just soak the solution in your sink for about an hour…rinse, repeat.
Dmac (49b16c) — 2/24/2009 @ 9:34 amI think someone should make one of those Calvin & Hobbes bumperstickers, with Calvin taking a tinkle on an O!
JD (ad7346) — 2/24/2009 @ 9:35 amGrand Kleagle Byrd (D-KKK) thanks you for you diligence.
JD (ad7346) — 2/24/2009 @ 9:35 amUrea-ist!
fat tony (83f355) — 2/24/2009 @ 9:36 amYou should know that in the context of the times some people are going to see it differently than it was intended.
Translation: if a grievance – monger is looking for any hint of a perceived slight, no matter how ridiculous, he’s in business.
Dmac (49b16c) — 2/24/2009 @ 9:37 amWas there any truth to the rumor that Obama was going to appoint Randall Robinson to a White House post? That would be almost as much fun as have Jocelyn Elders back.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 2/24/2009 @ 9:38 amI must be in the dark a bit… errr… sorry about that, the lack of illumination. I need to google Randall Robinson (is that legal?) to find out about him. Is he interested in propagandizing the chillrun too?
John Hitchcock (fb941d) — 2/24/2009 @ 9:41 amOh, wow. He’s a serious head case.
…wow…
John Hitchcock (fb941d) — 2/24/2009 @ 9:46 amIt’s always good to gather the facts. But true, they’re not all stupid. Some of them are lying.
Pablo (99243e) — 2/24/2009 @ 9:46 amI actually quite liked Elders, with her errant outbursts exploding all around. She actually spoke what was on her mind, without all the filters and parsing we usually witness. And she was right about teen – aged pregnancy and the consequences to the urban poor; I can’t remember any other Dem discussing that topic since Moynihan did so many decades ago.
Dmac (49b16c) — 2/24/2009 @ 9:47 amJohn – Google him. Think cannibalism after Katrina, reparations movement.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 2/24/2009 @ 9:47 amRobinson was the tool that told us about the cannibalism in the Superdome after Katrina. Prior to that, I had no idea that black people were inclined to dine on each other in a pinch.
Pablo (99243e) — 2/24/2009 @ 9:48 amDmac – She was fun, but a lot of what she said also did not make much sense.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 2/24/2009 @ 9:50 amThe things you learn when you listen to race baiters. Like this:
Pablo (99243e) — 2/24/2009 @ 9:50 am“Prior to that, I had no idea that black people were inclined to dine on each other in a pinch.”
Pablo – Do you mean in this country?
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 2/24/2009 @ 9:52 amYes, daley, I’m thinking Cajun style.
Pablo (99243e) — 2/24/2009 @ 9:53 amSounds a lot like Rev. Hatey that preacher that Baracky could no more denounce than his racist Grandmother.
JD (ad7346) — 2/24/2009 @ 9:54 amDmac wrote:
Puhleeze. Elders’ “answer” to teenage pregnancy was to teach kids how to get to third base, hoping they would have the self-restraint not to stretch it into an inside-the-you-know-what home run.
L.N. Smithee (d2c14d) — 2/24/2009 @ 10:04 amL.N. – Where have you been? Good to see you.
I thought Elders’ solution to teen pregnancy was masturbation.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 2/24/2009 @ 10:06 amI remember during the Clinton administration’s time there was a woman running around to all sorts of school districts and holding mandatory school assemblies. Parents didn’t need to be told about the assemblies or what was said in them. Parents didn’t need to be warned. Parents couldn’t opt-out their children.
And what did this woman say? Among other things, the only bad sex was sex where one didn’t consent. Age didn’t matter. Gender didn’t matter. Parental opinion didn’t matter.
I sure would love to be able to remember her name. There was some good pirate video of her assemblies.
John Hitchcock (fb941d) — 2/24/2009 @ 10:11 amHave they banned King Kong yet. Clearly King Kong was meant to represent King (Lebron) James.
gus (36e9a7) — 2/24/2009 @ 10:11 amHave they banned King Kong yet. Clearly King Kong was meant to represent King (Lebron) James.
gus (36e9a7) — 2/24/2009 @ 10:11 amWhen is Eric Holders conversation on race set to begin. Before or after all C/onservatives have been carted off to the Gulags
gus (36e9a7) — 2/24/2009 @ 10:14 amPeccator Dubious wrote:
It may not “help,” but it needs to be said if they are sincere in wanting to have a real dialogue about race.
As most of you know, I am a black man. I am in my third day of preparing a massive blog post on this Chimptoon biz (I have to keep revising it because the situation has kept getting worse), and the tonal difference of the coverage of Obama’s “lipstick” remark is one of the things I address.
The MSM rushed to the defense of Obama in that incident, painstakingly explaining a context that exonerated Obama from malicious, misogynistic intent. In some cases, reporters apologized for even acknowledging the McCain camp’s objection to Obama’s remark. I hope John Ziegler highlights that in his Media Malpractice DVD.
Also upcoming: A separate post on a shockingly ignorant statement by Eric Holder in the conclusion of his “Nation of Cowards” speech. Watch this spot.
L.N. Smithee (d2c14d) — 2/24/2009 @ 10:18 amOops. Didn’t close my tag on the Ziegler DVD. Sorry Squire, I scratched the record.
L.N. Smithee (d2c14d) — 2/24/2009 @ 10:20 amThe point of the original cartoon specifically that of confusing Obama with a chimp.
There’s a long history of racist references to blacks as monkeys.
It was not a caricature – cf. an image of three chimp obamas covering eyes ears and mouth see no evil etc- it had no point in reference to his response to an issue, there was no subtle dig at evident confusion or obliviousness -see images of GWB scratching his head- It was simply clearly violently racist.
Obama>monkey>dead.
I understand that subtlety is not the strong point of this page but it’s getting worse and worse.
We talk about race too much, without thinking.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/21/opinion/21blow.html?scp=2&sq=poll%20racist%20whites&st=cse
If the cartoon at the top of this thread had been captioned
“why white women love black men” it would’ve been racist too.
But remember the finalists for the RNC were a black man, a member of a whites only country club and well, the last one gets into subtlety again so why bother?
P. Favor (f26fef) — 2/24/2009 @ 10:33 amAnd you defend Jesse Helms.
Hilarious.
P.Favor, prove that the point of the cartoon was confusing Obama with a chimp in a racist connotation. Just prove it instead of asserting it.
BTW, who defends Jesse Helms?
Is there anything about your comment that is factual?
SPQR (72771e) — 2/24/2009 @ 10:37 amCry ne a river.
Techie (6b5d8d) — 2/24/2009 @ 10:37 am“me”
Techie (6b5d8d) — 2/24/2009 @ 10:37 amThat might make sense…if Obama were an editorial cartoonist, or if Sean Delonas were running for POTUS.
Pablo (99243e) — 2/24/2009 @ 10:41 am“The point of the original cartoon specifically that of confusing Obama with a chimp.”
P. Favor – Not according to the artist of the cartoon or the N.Y. Post. Their statements on the matter do not count I suppose.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 2/24/2009 @ 10:44 amWould you flesh that history out, please? And while you’re at it, could you show how such references are unique to blacks and exclusive of other humans?
Why would that be racist?
Pablo (99243e) — 2/24/2009 @ 10:46 amP. Favor parroted:
P. Favor, why don’t you explain to all of us what the purpose was in creating a cartoon depicting the assassination of Obama.
If you’re a mind reader, and are so sure the cartoonist was being “clearly violently racist,” then you must know what he hoped to accomplish. Don’t chicken out and say something like “Duh, I don’t know, I’m not a racist” — you’ve already claimed you know what was in the guy’s head.
Elaborate. I dare you.
L.N. Smithee (d2c14d) — 2/24/2009 @ 10:46 amAnd if had picked the right numbers on my lottery ticket Saturday, I’d be a millionaire.
The fact is, the caption isn’t “why white women love black men”. Try dealing with reality before you go into inconsequential “what ifs”.
Steverino (69d941) — 2/24/2009 @ 10:51 amPor Favor, please explain to me why it is racist for someone to explain why white women love black men. That way I can call my white daughter a racist every time she opens her mouth to explain why her last few relationships have been with black men. I really want to call her a racist, because she obviously is. Ya know?
John Hitchcock (fb941d) — 2/24/2009 @ 10:54 amIf memory serves me, Obama’a Mother was white, his first daddy was black and his second daddy was indonesian.
gus (36e9a7) — 2/24/2009 @ 10:55 amThat the chimp was meant to be Obama might make sense if the cop had said “sign the next bill” instead of “write the next bill”, and if there wasn’t the “infinite monkey theorem” … but there are those things and differences, and so it refers to Congress, not Obama. Some people, it seems, are more eager to be outraged than they are to understand.
htom (412a17) — 2/24/2009 @ 11:00 amLiberalism is closer to logic than is conservatism when scanning through dictionaries. All other instances, not so much.
John Hitchcock (fb941d) — 2/24/2009 @ 11:04 amhtom wrote:
DING DING DING DING DING! We have a winner!
Thank you for not dumbing yourself down for people who are willfully ignorant (and you know who you are … come to think of it, you probably don’t)!
L.N. Smithee (d2c14d) — 2/24/2009 @ 11:04 amElders’ “answer” to teenage pregnancy was to teach kids how to get to third base,
I agree that her contextual abilities were often terrible, but the underlying message at times made sense. If she had been able to tone down the rhetoric, the resulting uproar could’ve been avoided.
Dmac (49b16c) — 2/24/2009 @ 11:06 amI live in NY and the only paper I’ll actually shell out money for is the NY Post, and that’s rarely. From now on, I’ll pass. What a bunch of pussies.
Peg C. (48175e) — 2/24/2009 @ 11:06 amWhat the artist intends, what his media allows, and what his audience sees, are three entirely different things. Since the audience is the only what* of the three that puts a roof on his table and food over his head*, he should not be blamed for regretting that he did not make them as happy as he thought he would.
*(sic)
nk (b70aca) — 2/24/2009 @ 11:09 amDmac wrote:
The same could have been said of James Watt, Reagan’s talk-first-think-later Secretary of the Interior. He was dead right about certain Indian reservations being a perfect example of the failure of socialism, but once he said it out loud somehow thinking he wouldn’t be called on it, Reagan had to shove him out the door.
L.N. Smithee (d2c14d) — 2/24/2009 @ 11:12 amP. Favor – Where did you go?
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 2/24/2009 @ 11:13 amWhat a bunch of pussies.
Given Murdoch’s previous craveness regarding his dealings with the Chinese, this was just more par for the course. Not surprising in the least – as Allan mentioned, it’s all about the money with him…always.
Dmac (49b16c) — 2/24/2009 @ 12:14 pmHe’s a businessman; why wouldn’t be about the money?
AD - RtR/OS (8de25e) — 2/24/2009 @ 12:16 pmRopelight wrote:
Not only hasn’t Sharpton apologized, for months after the punitive damages were awarded to Pagones, Fat Albert refused to pay up, insisting he was destitute. When quizzed about the crisp, new, expensive suits he wore in television appearances, he insisted they were all donated.
Eventually, Pagones was paid after a group of black businessmen — including Manhattan borough President/broadcast mogul Percy Sutton and O.J. Simpson attorney Johnnie Cochran — pooled together to take the burden off of Sharpton.
Sharpton and his two fellow stooges in the Brawley hoax (now-disbarred attorneys Alton Maddox and C. Vernon Mason) dared Pagones to sue them for saying he raped Brawley, insisting they would be able to prove his guilt in court. Pagones sued the three of them and Brawley for defamation. Brawley refused to appear in court, but did later appear at a rally in her support. The court was not amused.
From the 1998 NY Supreme Court decision ending Pagones vs. Maddox et al appeals:
For reasons unrelated directly to the Brawley case, both Alton Maddox and C. Vernon Mason were eventually disbarred. However, there’s no such thing as “disbarring” a reverend, and Sharpton continues to pose as a religious and ethical man. Those who have all the facts know better.
L.N. Smithee (d2c14d) — 2/24/2009 @ 12:26 pmYou say Tawana Brawley
Pablo (99243e) — 2/24/2009 @ 12:34 pmI say Crystal Gail Mangum
Let’s call the whole thing off
How funny is this? Funny enough for the United States Senate? Wouldn’t it be hilarious if the President was assassinated? AAAAhahahahahahaaaaa!
Oh, not this President. That President. Funny, right?
Pablo (99243e) — 2/24/2009 @ 12:39 pmBad TinyURL! Re-linky.
Pablo (99243e) — 2/24/2009 @ 12:44 pmPablo wrote:
Not surprisingly, the disgraced Maddox came to the defense of Mike Nifong after his case against the Duke lacrosse players unraveled following the players’ 60 Minutes interview.
Who conducted that interview? Why, that virulent black-hating CBS reporter, Ed Bradley (/sarcasm).
L.N. Smithee (d2c14d) — 2/24/2009 @ 12:45 pm“prove that the point of the cartoon was confusing Obama with a chimp in a racist connotation.”
As opposed to confusing Obama with a chimp in some other way?
“I live in NY and the only paper I’ll actually shell out money for is the NY Post.”
The Newspaper that puts a rats face on John Jr. Gotti when he’s outed as talking to the Feds. “Stop Snitchin'” for white folks
“Your readers are our shoplifters.”
P. Favor (d59369) — 2/24/2009 @ 1:05 pm-Bloomingdale’s Marvin Traub to Murdoch.
That one may not be true but everyone knows why its funny.
Wow – Obama wrote this stimulus bill? He’s been busy. I bet that one bill alone has more pages than both of his memoirs!
carlitos (ebd4ab) — 2/24/2009 @ 1:08 pmNow Murdoch owes me an apology, as unlike most folks I actually read the Post and I am extremely irritated that anyone would give these race baiting crooks any deference at all.
I want a paper that isn’t afraid of comics like this. I do not want a paper that gives Al Sharpton cover.
Joco (4cdfb7) — 2/24/2009 @ 1:10 pmP.Favor, assuming your premise is one of the more obvious logical fallacies.
SPQR (72771e) — 2/24/2009 @ 1:13 pmHe’s a businessman; why wouldn’t be about the money?
Nothing wrong with making as much money as you can, but if you’re going to sacrifice all of your morals and sell – out people attempting to speak freely (as in his Chinese dealings), then you’re pretty much an amoral scumbag in my world.
Dmac (49b16c) — 2/24/2009 @ 1:16 pmDmac, I used to get so furious when I lived in Europe and had Sky satellite. Based on the deal Murdoch made to access the Chinese market, the China propaganda channel was right in the middle of the other legit news channels. Reprehensible.
carlitos (ebd4ab) — 2/24/2009 @ 1:19 pmTo say that Obama wrote the stimulus bill is really to say that Billy Ayers wrote it. So the fact that the Post cartoonist used a chimp rather than a white ape is further proof of its racism.
fat tony (158cae) — 2/24/2009 @ 1:29 pmThat is, if I follow P.Favor correctly.
fat tony (158cae) — 2/24/2009 @ 1:30 pmP. Favor, there are some questions for you at #80 and #81. Your response would be appreciated.
Pablo (99243e) — 2/24/2009 @ 1:31 pmP. Favor, there are some questions for you at #80 and #81. Your response would be appreciated.
Comment by Pablo — 2/24/2009 @ 1:31 pm
I would also suggest Por Favor to look at 75 and 83 and answer those. 😉
John Hitchcock (fb941d) — 2/24/2009 @ 1:49 pmPor favor assumes that since it is a mental midget, and has no grasp of civics, that everyone else is too. Apparently, the enlightened Leftist, every time it sees a xanax-eating wine-drinking chimp, it thinks of Baracky. But you are the racists.
Who wrote the 1st “stimulus” bill, asshat?
Good Allah, stooopid that pervasive should be painful.
JD (f4f9e7) — 2/24/2009 @ 1:52 pmYup, I’m the racist for raising my daughter to realize there is no such thing as “race” and all people where created equal. I’m the racist for being glad she didn’t let “race” get involved in her date-selections. But those card-carrying Democrats I used to work with and for aren’t racists. Despite their hatred for jews, blacks and “zebras.” Yup, that’s it.
John Hitchcock (fb941d) — 2/24/2009 @ 1:57 pmpeople
John Hitchcock (fb941d) — 2/24/2009 @ 1:58 pmwherewere createdWait, is Baracky a xanax eater? Who knew?
P. Favor – When you see a tall building do you immediately think Penis?
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 2/24/2009 @ 2:08 pmWhen I see a tall building, I immediately feel sorry for all the small buildings. We need to tear down the tall buildings so the small buildings don’t feel so inferior.
John Hitchcock (fb941d) — 2/24/2009 @ 2:10 pmJohn Hitchcock wrote:
You know who agrees with you? Rush.
No, not Rush Limbaugh! RUSH — the brilliant Canadian band with an existentialist outlook!
From 1978’s Hemispheres LP:
Live performance here.
L.N. Smithee (d2c14d) — 2/24/2009 @ 2:28 pmP. Favor wrote:
Ah, yes. False dichotomy AND issuing a rhetorical question in lieu of an answer.
You have learned well from your master, Poor Favor.
L.N. Smithee (d2c14d) — 2/24/2009 @ 2:35 pmJD wrote:
It is, but not painful for them. It’s painful for the rest of us.
L.N. Smithee (d2c14d) — 2/24/2009 @ 2:38 pmPor favor is clearly and objectively a racist. When it sees a depiction of a xanax eating wine drinking chimp, despite it being labeled as the people who wrote the first stimulus bill, it sees Obama.
JD (f4f9e7) — 2/24/2009 @ 2:41 pmAgain, the saddest part about all of this is how it diminishes actual instances of racism. The boy that cried wolf theory…
Comment by Dmac — 2/24/2009 @ 1:16 pm
Murdoch came out of the journalism business, and now he’s in entertainment;
AD - RtR/OS (8de25e) — 2/24/2009 @ 2:53 pmof course he’s an amoral scumbag, just a very successful one.
Isn’t Murdoch the one who owns that cable news organization with all the highest ratings? Isn’t that the one news organization all the power-monger liberals hate? Isn’t that the organization that is declared by liberals to be extremely conservative?
So, if that specific part of MSM is so financially successful, why is it again other parts of MSM don’t try to do the same?
John Hitchcock (fb941d) — 2/24/2009 @ 2:59 pmIt is probably because of that phrase that may not be spoken in MSM company:
AD - RtR/OS (8de25e) — 2/24/2009 @ 3:06 pmFair & Balanced!
why is it again other parts of MSM don’t try to do the same?
Because they’d be forced to admit that they’re usually to the left of Mao – having your pants pulled down like that on a live broadcast would hurt them too much.
Dmac (49b16c) — 2/24/2009 @ 3:10 pmanyone got a link to the cartoon?
Joe (c0e4f8) — 2/24/2009 @ 3:57 pmLink.
John Hitchcock (fb941d) — 2/24/2009 @ 3:59 pmWhy is that guy letting Obama walk away with his woman?
j curtis (ddf1a9) — 2/24/2009 @ 4:04 pmComment by j curtis — 2/24/2009 @ 4:04 pm
Moby alert.
God
Stashiu3 (460dc1) — 2/24/2009 @ 4:57 pmForgives
You
Stash – I love how the Leftists have to Moby comments to make people out to be racists. The only way they can make the argument is to make up evidence.
JD (f4f9e7) — 2/24/2009 @ 5:15 pmj curtis, that’s no woman. That’s your mother.
L.N. Smithee (d2c14d) — 2/24/2009 @ 5:25 pmWouldn’t it be awful if people were dehumanized by cartoonists for the consumption of schoolchildren?
Pablo (99243e) — 2/24/2009 @ 5:26 pm129
What? We’re supposed to see a cartoon chimp walking off with a white woman and NOT believe it’s supposed to be Obama now? It’s hard to figure it all out.
j curtis (e00ed8) — 2/24/2009 @ 11:18 pmWho is this “We’re” you speak of Moby? Again…
God
Forgives
You
(Much nicer than the G.F.Y. you deserve.)
Stashiu3 (460dc1) — 2/25/2009 @ 3:08 amDon’t forget his role in the Freddy’s Fashion Mart disaster. His race-baiting has cost lives, yet he gets treated with respect by the press and Democrats.
Rob Crawford (04f50f) — 2/25/2009 @ 8:12 amOh, go to hell.
Rob Crawford (04f50f) — 2/25/2009 @ 8:13 am134
I think you are being a bit obtuse to miss the point. My comment emphasized the unreasonableness of the liberal tendency to jump to a chimp=Obama conclusion.
I’ll happily debate you on this but you’ll have to move past the name calling.
j curtis (a3a686) — 2/25/2009 @ 9:29 am