Monday, February 23, 2009

Looks like I'm not the only one...

...who's "too clever by half".

I haven't posted anything about the latest 'cartoon-scandal' before - mostly because it's already over-done and I try to stay away from doing a straight "me-too" thing here on the Gazette.

But something happened the other day to change my mind.

We've got this talk-radio station here in the Denver-area, and they carry a drive-home show - "Caplis & Silverman". They do a sort of medium-power "Hannity & Colmes" schtick, with Dan Caplis in the 'Conservative' seat and Craig Silverman usually trying to defend the indefensible.

Yes, it's been done, but I usually really like the way Caplis is able to destroy opposing arguements by just maintaing his cool, staying focused, keeping to the facts instead of 'feelings' and almost never biting at Silverman's straw-arguments, and I also keep listening because they hit a lot of local issues.


Holy Crap, were they in-synch with their PC, apologetic (nearly apoplectic) hand-wringing over the "Cartoon Scandal"!

The only thing that kept them from singing
"It was Wrong, Racist, and Called for Obama's Assassination" in four-part harmony, was that there are only two of them with dedicated microphones.

Personally - I didn't see it.

Having been reading & banging on the
"Great Generational Theft Act of 2009" as much as I have (and will continue to do), my first reaction to the newest "Killer Cartoon" was:

"Heh... Yeah - Crazed Chimp Shot - Crazed Chimp had to have Written the 'Stimulus' - Have to Get A New Crazed Chimp If They Want to Write a New One..."

But 'Oh, No', I am told over the sound of the knuckle-chafing hand-wringing - 'The *Chimp* is really Racist Code for *Obama*' (who, of course, wrote the Stim... no, wait - he didn't) and the police officers who have shot the *Chimp* aren't really a temporal reference to the sensationalized story of actual Officers who had to shoot an Actual Crazed Chimp - No! - that's really a call for the *assassination* of *Obama*.

Now, I've come to expect that sort of thing from Silverman, who appears to check the LGBT/Rainbow-Push-Index to know whether righteous indignation is in order, but that Dan Caplis wasn't even trying to apply Occam's Razor to what was right in front of him?

This finally bothered me so much, that I just pulled over and called-in to the show, pointing out my reaction to the cartoon (before the Reverend Sharpton told me what I was *allowed* to think, of course) and attempting to explain that sometimes-a-comic-is-just-a-comic and that the sort of Offense-Seeking-Grievance-Mongering that has resulted is not only a direct connection to Eric Holder's "Nation of Cowards" speech, but also the very reason that any "frank discussion of Race" will never, ever be allowed in the US (for, invariably, the Sharpton-Shakedown and sycophantic 'mea-culpas' will ensue).

In response, (by the "Conservative" no less) I was told that to take the cartoon @ face-value - and without applying *Racist Code* to it, the Author and the Newspaper was just being "Too Clever By Half".

As I was given the bum's-rush off-line, my parting remark was that I must be more "Post-Racial" than Eric Holder.

Well, now it looks like I'm not the only Clever-Kid on the block:

Will The Real Monkey Stand Up!
Rev. Peterson of BOND Action, Inc. Blasts Sharpton Over NY Post Cartoon Controversy

Yup - looks like the Reverend Jesse Lee Peterson of BOND is calling 'foul' on the Race-Baiters as well.

"The Post cartoon was provocative, but not racist. And it certainly was not an 'invitation' to assassinate President Obama. These are manufactured allegations by racist left-wing Democrat operatives. Sharpton, the NAACP, and their angry supporters want to intimidate and silence independent media outlets like The New York Post and The FOX News Channel. The cartoon was poking fun at the ineptness of those who wrote the horrible stimulus welfare package -- nothing more.

"I've said repeatedly on my national radio show that Barack Obama was elected because of white guilt and black racism. The majority of whites voted for Obama to prove once and for all that they don't have racial hang-ups. Ninety-six percent of blacks voted for him because of his race. We now have the first black president and his party leading our nation towards socialism; and anyone who dares poke fun or criticize are racists?

"Most blacks see racism under every rock and newspaper because they've never repented of their anger and racism toward whites. But this so-called boycott is not about racism; it's an attempt to muzzle free speech. And it's apparent who the real monkey is in this circus."
So - who's interpretation to go with?

Grievance-Monger "Reverend Sharpton" and other like-minded career
Shakedown Artists...

Or Reverend Peterson, who has always held that self-determination is the way to build families & society?

Never mind - I think I've already got it figured out.

- MuscleDaddy

P.S. - Dan Caplis - that you immediately "recognized" the *Chimp* as 'code' for *Obama* - means that you also had to automatically associate *Obama* with the *Chimp*

... so what's really goin' on?

P.P.S. - The morning guy on KHOW - Peter Boyles - is great.

1 comment:

  1. We've been subjected to 8 hears of George W. Bush being described as "Chimpy", "Chimpler", "Curious George", etc., and now a political cartoon featuring a primate is evidence of racism? Please.

    I remember a controversy a while back, when a Southwest Airlines flight attendant called out to the passengers when the plane had reached the terminal: "Eeenie, meenie, miney, mo! Grab your bags; it's time to go!"

    A couple of black passengers were offended by this, and complained. Apparently, the flight attendant in question had only heard the version of the rhyme that goes "Grab a tiger by his toe", not the form that uses a different __ger word. A community affairs show on one of the NPR stations that The Bride of Monster listens to in her car featured this fascinating observation by an elderly black woman: "Here we have a flight attendant who had never heard the racist version of that rhyme. Shouldn't we see that as a sign of progress?"

    I mention that to draw this analogy between the two.
    What these two stories have in common is that, in order for a person to have racist intent, they have to have been exposed to the racist idea in question. A person who thinks black=chimp can find racism in the cartoon, but in order to know that people would find the cartoon to be racist, one must have some awareness of the stereotype.

    So, there is just one way to be certain to not offend sensitive people: you have to teach eveeryone "catch a n__ger by his toe" and "blacks are sub-human chimps", so that they'll know how offensive they are, and that they must never think these horrible things, nor say anything remotely close to them. You must deliberately perpetuate the very thing that offends people, lest you inadvertently offend them.

    And that, in a word, is sick.


We reserve the right to delete comments, but the failure to delete any particular comment should not be interpreted as an endorsement thereof.

In general, we expect comments to be relevant to the story, or to a prior comment that is relevant; and we expect some minimal level of civility. Defining that line is inherently subjective, so try to stay clear of insulting remarks. If you respond to a comment that is later deleted, we may take your response with it. Deleting your comment isn't a personal knock on you, so don't take it as such.

We allow a variety of ways for commenters to identify themselves; those who choose not to do so should take extra care. Absent any prior context in which they may be understood, ironic comments may be misinterpreted. Once you've earned a reputation for contributing to a conversation, we are likely to be more tolerant in those gray areas, as we'll understand where you're coming from.