I believe this cartoonist Pat Oliphant is from the Washington Post.

http://us.news1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/uc/20041116/lpo041116.gif

If the right did anything half this sterotypical, we would be labeled racist, bigots, Klansmen so fast it wouldn't even be funny.  But Watching liberals self-destruct, now thats funny.

First off, it's a CARTOON!!!  Second, I don't see ANYTHING  "stereotypical", "disgusting", "grotesque" or "racist" about this.  And, trust me, I've seen MUCH worse in my local paper re: Barack Obama, Jack Ryan & a host of other politicians. ::)


Oh...Barack Obama...officially my first political crush...

First off, it's a CARTOON!!!  Second, I don't see ANYTHING  "stereotypical", "disgusting", "grotesque" or "racist" about this

I do, BIG TIME!  That cartoon is in very bad taste.  Shame on Pat Oliphant.  He ought to know better.

There are two more that are being talked about, but I can't seem to find them.  They both show Condi Rice with big lips and bare feet (one with legs spread.)  Nice.

There are two more that are being talked about, but I can't seem to find them.  They both show Condi Rice with big lips and bare feet (one with legs spread.)  Nice.


O.k I don't know anything about Condi Rice but I have to ask a simple question? Does s/he have big lips in real life? If so, it's a charicature and that's what cartoons are all about. I agree with 80s Cheerleader.

O.k I don't know anything about Condi Rice but I have to ask a simple question? Does s/he have big lips in real life? If so, it's a charicature and that's what cartoons are all about. I agree with 80s Cheerleader.


http://i.cnn.net/cnn/2004/US/02/07/sept11.commission.ap/vert.condi.rice.ap.jpg

The big lips thing in these cartoons are meant to sterotype black people.  Again if this was the right we would be called racist and bigots in a heartbeat.

As a black woman, I don't see anything necessarily racist about it. It's a caricature of her facial features. It may suggest her constant following, as opposed to leading, in her position. So, it may be suggesting something against her character.

Tanya

Disgusting, grotesque, racist Condi Rice cartoons.
Methinks the Bushie doth protest too much...

The artist does indeed make fun of her big ass lips.. but errrm.. she does indeed have big ass lips.

I dont think this is him portraying his as a stereotypical Black woman, it's just him making fun of her facial features. If this was an overtly racist cartoon it wouldn't have been published.

ISTM that what he's getting worked up about here is not any perceived racism in the cartoon, but the oh, so dreadful unfairness that if it were drawn by a right-wing cartoonist, we lefties would be up in arms about the racism of it.

But... IMO, Condoleeza Rice is in a position of power, and deserves to have the mickey taken out of her.  I don't see that this toon is really that racially-motivated.

Unless, of course, Rush Limbaugh has been complaining that it's a racist cartoon.  If that were the case, then I'm sure he'd be right  :-\\

Cus I Have never eeeeeeever heard Rush say anything that could be thought of as Racist ::)

The cartoonist may not have intended the cartoon to stereotype Dr. Rice as an African American woman, but if he depicts her with big lips and being utterly subservient to the boss, conservatives WILL jump on him, and they have.

The Bush Administration has made a great show of their "minority" cabinet members.  As Cornell West says, the Bush Administration needs a racially diverse cabinet in order to carry out their pernicious policies.  See, the Bushies think Americans are REEEAL stupid.  They think Americans will swallow political iniquities readily as long as the Administration appears to be racially progressive...and they may be right!

Some people might say that to refrain from publishing typically grotesque cartoons of people in power simply because because they are black would in itself be racist..ie being condescending in some way suggesting that they need special protection..its a very tricky area!!
we used to have a satirical puppet show in the UK which was quite vicious towards all and sundry and they did not treat the  black puppert characters with kid gloves by any means... and I don't recall anyone having a go at them .. they portrayed eg Frank Bruno a black boxing champion with exaggerated big lips but they did that to Mick Jagger as well... it so much depends on the context ...

Some people might say that to refrain from publishing typically grotesque cartoons of people in power simply because because they are black would in itself be racist..

Yep.  Me, for one :)

I believe this cartoonist Pat Oliphant is from the Washington Post.

http://us.news1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/uc/20041116/lpo041116.gif

If the right did anything half this sterotypical, we would be labeled racist, bigots, Klansmen so fast it wouldn't even be funny.  But Watching liberals self-destruct, now thats funny




  Jesus H. Baldheaded Christ On A Pony, GW..!

  The race card?  At a time like this..?  Is there really that big a flap over this..?

  Let me teach you a new word...C-A-R-I-C-A-T-U-R-E.  Artists have been doing this for years.  I figured you'd be more upset that Oliphant made your hero look like an incompotent, bungling ignoramus...oh, wait a minute...naah...

   Jesus H. Baldheaded Christ On A Pony, GW..!

   The race card?  At a time like this..?  Is there really that big a flap over this..?

   Let me teach you a new word...C-A-R-I-C-A-T-U-R-E.  Artists have been doing this for years.  I figured you'd be more upset that Oliphant made your hero look like an incompotent, bungling ignoramus...oh, wait a minute...naah...


I know what you mean, but I still wouldn't have left the race card open to be played.

Oh come'on guys, the conditune is a visious, racist, gratutious attack on a wonderful American - and smart too.  Condi deserves our humble admiration, no, our adulation.  After all, she knew for sure that Saddam was buying yellow cake from Nigire, that he had WMD etc.  She does, you know, have a Ph. D. in something or other from Stanford I  think.  She is next to God (or close to His anointed one).

As a black woman, I don't see anything necessarily racist about it. It's a caricature of her facial features. It may suggest her constant following, as opposed to leading, in her position. So, it may be suggesting something against her character.

Tanya


I been a bit busy and just got to this post.  I have to second Tanya on this one.  I thought it was more
of a biting satirical caricature.  I think it much more distasteful that she got her position by stroking
the bushes, beginning with poppy. 

HaHa, you said stroking the bushes!!!!!  ;D  :D  ;D  :D

Tanya

Oh come'on guys, the conditune is a visious, racist, gratutious attack on a wonderful American - and smart too.  Condi deserves our humble admiration, no, our adulation.  After all, she knew for sure that Saddam was buying yellow cake from Nigire, that he had WMD etc.  She does, you know, have a Ph. D. in something or other from Stanford I  think.  She is next to God (or close to His anointed one).


Are you being sarcastic? Or, serious? I don't know if I should laugh or consider it!  :-\\

Tanya

The cartoonist may not have intended the cartoon to stereotype Dr. Rice as an African American woman, but if he depicts her with big lips and being utterly subservient to the boss, conservatives WILL jump on him, and they have.


Well, this becomes a political issue rather than a racial one then.

Has it also occurred to people that the lips portrayed may be imitating a beak and that she may be imitating the sound of a bird? I think the word 'AWWRK!' at the start of the speech bubble gives an indication - the big lip factor may not even be one.  ;D

http://i.cnn.net/cnn/2004/US/02/07/sept11.commission.ap/vert.condi.rice.ap.jpg

The big lips thing in these cartoons are meant to sterotype black people.  Again if this was the right we would be called racist and bigots in a heartbeat.


Ummm, newsflash dude, but we already do call you a bunch of bigots... for wanting to discriminate against gays. Except you guys aren't dealing in cartoons, but in something that actually matters... public policy.

Would it be racist if I called her a "brown nose" because we know she has her nose so far up Duyba's @$$?





Cat

Would it be racist if I called her a "brown nose" because we know she has her nose so far up Duyba's @$$?


Ooh! Cutting comment there, Catwoman.  ;D

Just like NOW and Queer Nation had their noses up Bill Clinton's @$$? ::)

They would have been up Hillary's @$$ too if the stick hadn't got in the way.

Would it be racist if I called her a "brown nose" because we know she has her nose so far up Duyba's @$$?





Cat

Ummm, newsflash dude, but we already do call you a bunch of bigots... for wanting to discriminate against gays. Except you guys aren't dealing in cartoons, but in something that actually matters... public policy.


Well I guess that is okay.  It really is.  I have no problem calling democrats bigots when it comes to blacks, Christians, and whites.  I honestly believe the democrats have true hate for whites and Christians especially, and I stand by those words.

If someone doesn't like liberals or republicans is there an alternative party to choose?

Well I guess that is okay.  It really is.  I have no problem calling democrats bigots when it comes to blacks, Christians, and whites.  I honestly believe the democrats have true hate for whites and Christians especially, and I stand by those words.


Not only is that ridiculous, it's egregious! (Been waiting a long time to use that word, thanks GW, I always knew you were good for something!) Please explain how all Democrats have a hate for Whites and Christians? But before you do, let me just say first that in regards to the Christian thing (and what the hell, even the white thing) that the majority of Democrats are both White AND Christian, just like the majority of America. How exactly is it that a political party could thrive the way the Democratic party has, when a supposed central theme to their ideolog is the hatred for not only the majority of themselves but also the majority of voters? It's absurd!

If someone doesn't like liberals or republicans is there an alternative party to choose?


More than some think, here are SOME of the other parties (besides republicans and democrats):

Libertarian (very very small government, only to print money and work the military)
Green (pro-environment)
United Fascist
Socialist
Prohabition (ban acohol)
Marijuana reform (make pot legal)
American (pro-constition)
Constitution (also pro-constitution)
Reform

And there are ALWAYS TONS of independent candidates running under no party name.

And other great Condi Rice cartoons like this:

http://boortz.com/images/funny/111804_condi_2.gif

Well, the "parrot cartoon" did not strike me as racist.  And Condi DOES have those buck teeth and huge lips.  Just ONCE I'd like her do say "What you talkin' about Willis?" when she gets frustrated, because when the reporters question her hard, she looks like she could be Gary Coleman's long-lost sister.

But...

I saw a cartoon where they had her portrayed as "Aunt Jemima", and some talk show people have been calling her a "Jemima" and a "House N-word".  Similar epithets were thrown at Colin Powell at various times by left-leaning black celebrities.

Mind you I am a middle aged white guy, but it seems to me that if a black man or black woman are not 'allowed" to have conservative political views, else they be called "Jemimas" or "Toms" or "House N-words" by the black "establishment", then intellectual slavery is the rule of the day.  Interesting.

Personally, I do not like Condi Rice, and politically I think she is a lightweight.  And I think she is quite short in the accountability department.  But I respect her intellect and the fact that she has been successful in her life.  I don't need to throw racial epithets at her to disagree with her politics.

Too bad that is not the case with some of her detractors...

I saw a cartoon where they had her portrayed as "Aunt Jemima", and some talk show people have been calling her a "Jemima" and a "House N-word".  Similar epithets were thrown at Colin Powell at various times by left-leaning black celebrities.


Just who is calling her "Jemima" and "house n*****"?  That's just hateful.

Just who is calling her "Jemima" and "house n*****"?  That's just hateful.


Some (white) leftist radio host called her "Aunt Jemima". http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20041119/ap_on_re_us/radio_host_remark_2  He is also planning to give away free boxes of Aunt Jemima pancake mix and syrup today.  He also referred to Colin Powell as a Tom.

As for the "House N-word" commentary, several months back Harry Belafonte used that term to describe Colin Powell.  http://www.blacknewsweekly.com/195.html

If it were no so sad it would be funny.  Work hard to get educated and serve your country like Colin Powell and be branded a House N-word or an Uncle Tom.  Deal drugs to your fellow man and beat people over the head with a baseball bat and be beatified like Notorious P. I. G. or Tupac.

As for the "House N-word" commentary, several months back Harry Belafonte used that term to describe Colin Powell.  http://www.blacknewsweekly.com/195.html



Who wrote that article? Whoever it was, their grammar is atrocious! That isn't to say that the article itself doesn't deserve merit, but you'd think that any publication, especially one which claims to represent the Black community, would have it in their interest to make sure their writers used correct grammar. Just a thought.

Are you being sarcastic? Or, serious? I don't know if I should laugh or consider it!  :-\\

Tanya


I was totally serious.  ;)  To me, Condi is next to the Virgin Mary, she walks on water (always holding on to the Bush of course).  ;) 

Just like NOW and Queer Nation had their noses up Bill Clinton's @$$? ::)

They would have been up Hillary's @$$ too if the stick hadn't got in the way.




So far, this is the first really vulgar post in this thread.  We all know that Condi is a yes person, which is what Cat was refering to.  The fact that NOW and Queer Nation got some attention from Bubba isn't comprable, and the remak about Hillary is just gratuitous smut.  You should know better.

http://i.cnn.net/cnn/2004/US/02/07/sept11.commission.ap/vert.condi.rice.ap.jpg




Wait a sec here, what are those white thingies sticking out of Condi's head?  Sure look like horns to me.  Is she the devil incarnate or do they symbolize her... never mind.

Yes, it's very sad that achievers are ridiculed and thugs are lionized in certain elements of the African American community.  This speaks to the low self esteem of people who are frequently beaten down by circumstances before they even get a decent shot at life.

I never thought of Powell as an "Uncle Tom."  There are certain African American leaders who a perceive as working for the interests of the overclass and against the interests of African Americans, and underprviliged people at large.  They are "Uncle Toms."  I mean people like J.C. Watts and Clarence Thomas.




Some (white) leftist radio host called her "Aunt Jemima". http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20041119/ap_on_re_us/radio_host_remark_2  He is also planning to give away free boxes of Aunt Jemima pancake mix and syrup today.  He also referred to Colin Powell as a Tom.

As for the "House N-word" commentary, several months back Harry Belafonte used that term to describe Colin Powell.  http://www.blacknewsweekly.com/195.html

If it were no so sad it would be funny.  Work hard to get educated and serve your country like Colin Powell and be branded a House N-word or an Uncle Tom.  Deal drugs to your fellow man and beat people over the head with a baseball bat and be beatified like Notorious P. I. G. or Tupac.

Not only is that ridiculous, it's egregious! (Been waiting a long time to use that word, thanks GW, I always knew you were good for something!) Please explain how all Democrats have a hate for Whites and Christians? But before you do, let me just say first that in regards to the Christian thing (and what the hell, even the white thing) that the majority of Democrats are both White AND Christian, just like the majority of America. How exactly is it that a political party could thrive the way the Democratic party has, when a supposed central theme to their ideolog is the hatred for not only the majority of themselves but also the majority of voters? It's absurd!




http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v40/jholler/a77e2e85.jpg

Majority of the Democratic party is indeed white and Christian. However, it IS the most diverse, with intentions to serve the people in a democratic fashion. Striving towards freedom for all its members does not mean hatred for Christian whites. The logic is non-existent and quite frankly, the overall tone of the post spews hatred.

If I took your logic and put it towards the Republican party, I could honestly say that it hates all who isn't Anglo-Saxon, wealthy, Christian, and heterosexual b/c the membership of those not fitting these characteristics are drastically low.

Tanya

More than some think, here are SOME of the other parties (besides republicans and democrats):

Libertarian (very very small government, only to print money and work the military)
Green (pro-environment)
United Fascist
Socialist
Prohabition (ban acohol)
Marijuana reform (make pot legal)
American (pro-constition)
Constitution (also pro-constitution)
Reform

And there are ALWAYS TONS of independent candidates running under no party name.


Thanks for the info, GWBush. It's nice to know people aren't stuck to two parties.

Yes, it's very sad that achievers are ridiculed and thugs are lionized in certain elements of the African American community.  This speaks to the low self esteem of people who are frequently beaten down by circumstances before they even get a decent shot at life.

I never thought of Powell as an "Uncle Tom."  There are certain African American leaders who a perceive as working for the interests of the overclass and against the interests of African Americans, and underprviliged people at large.  They are "Uncle Toms."  I mean people like J.C. Watts and Clarence Thomas.





Why would Clarence Thomas be seen as a "Tom"?  Because he objects to affirmative action?  Is that the litmus test for being a Tom?

Why would Clarence Thomas be seen as a "Tom"?  Because he objects to affirmative action?  Is that the litmus test for being a Tom?


It is only in the past year that clarence has actually begun to vote differently on issues than antonin.
For the first 10 years (at least) he kept his mouth shut, didn't write majority/dissenting poistions.  It
was painful for his supporters, and even his detractors could not find any glee in it because it was
so much of an embarrassment that he should have taken the seat of Thurgood Marshall.  It was
obvious to all that whither goes antonin so goes clarence, three steps behind.

It is only in the past year that clarence has actually begun to vote differently on issues than antonin.
For the first 10 years (at least) he kept his mouth shut, didn't write majority/dissenting poistions.  It
was painful for his supporters, and even his detractors could not find any glee in it because it was
so much of an embarrassment that he should have taken the seat of Thurgood Marshall.  It was
obvious to all that whither goes antonin so goes clarence, three steps behind.


So if Clarence agrees with Antonin that makes him a Tom?  What would we call him if he agreed with, say, Jesse Jackson on every decision?  Would he be a "Tom" if he agreed with one of the Democratic appointees like Ruth Ginsberg?

The thought that Clarence Thomas is a "Tom" because he takes a conservative view of things is typical of the racist approach taken towards black government figures by many blacks today.  Instead of arguing the merits of an issue, just call the person a Tom or a "House N-word".

White racists LOVE that kind of behavior because it keeps racism as the rule of behavor, rather than the civilized discussion of differences in opinion.

By the way, here are the "Uncle Tom Statistics"...

Thomas and Scalia agree on 73% of all decisions
Souter and Ginsberg agree 85% of the time 
Rehnquist and Oconnor agree 79% of the time 
Rehnquist and Kennedy agree 77% of the time
Stevens and Souter agree 77% of the time


So if we are to call a justice an "Uncle Tom" because they agree frequently with other justices, it seems that the Court is loaded with Toms.

So if Clarence agrees with Antonin that makes him a Tom?  What would we call him if he agreed with, say, Jesse Jackson on every decision?  Would he be a "Tom" if he agreed with one of the Democratic appointees like Ruth Ginsberg?


Thomas and Scalia agree on 73% of all decisions
Souter and Ginsberg agree 85% of the time 
Rehnquist and Oconnor agree 79% of the time 
Rehnquist and Kennedy agree 77% of the time
Stevens and Souter agree 77% of the time


So if we are to call a justice an "Uncle Tom" because they agree frequently with other justices, it seems that the Court is loaded with Toms.


The difference being that all these justices are known to ask questions, and write opinions. Clarence
Thomas for as many years was known for not even putting forward any questions, and for not writing opinions.  He has, after more than a decade on the bench, just begun asserting
anything that would be construed as an individual opinion.  That is what why he has the reputation among blacks for being scalias lackey.  You may(or may not) be surprised to know that the African
American community is in many ways a conservative one, with respect for conservative opinions, but
that respect is not given freely.  Al Sharpton is not as beloved as some would like to have the white
population believe, but he is given a certain amount of respect because he says what he thinks, like it
or not.  Thomas will get the same measure of respect  when he begins to do the same(it may take him
a while though, since he has taken so long to getting around to it.)

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v40/jholler/a77e2e85.jpg


Is this supposed to serve as a response? A very poor attempt indeed!

The difference being that all these justices are known to ask questions, and write opinions. Clarence
Thomas for as many years was known for not even putting forward any questions, and for not writing opinions.  He has, after more than a decade on the bench, just begun asserting
anything that would be construed as an individual opinion.  That is what why he has the reputation among blacks for being scalias lackey.  You may(or may not) be surprised to know that the African
American community is in many ways a conservative one, with respect for conservative opinions, but
that respect is not given freely.  Al Sharpton is not as beloved as some would like to have the white
population believe, but he is given a certain amount of respect because he says what he thinks, like it
or not.  Thomas will get the same measure of respect  when he begins to do the same(it may take him
a while though, since he has taken so long to getting around to it.)


Here, here! I support that! I am no means of fan of Sharpton, and Thomas (well, I will keep my opinion to myself for the first time!  :-X )

Tanya

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v40/jholler/a77e2e85.jpg

"One cluepon per relationship"- is this your attempt at saying sorry to the whole of this forum, then?

It is only in the past year that clarence has actually begun to vote differently on issues than antonin.
For the first 10 years (at least) he kept his mouth shut, didn't write majority/dissenting poistions. 


How about the fact that the newest members rarely wrote those opinions?

Traditionally, the most senior member of the favoring/opposing opinion writes them.  This is not always the case, but most often it is.  And if you consider the length of time that people are on the Supreme Court, it is not surprising to me that for 10 years he would not write any.

This is much like how for the most part. junior US Senators are not heard from much.  They get the unknown (and uncared about) comittee appointments, and are almost unheard of until they are in for 5-10 years.  Of course, if you are Hillary Clinton, that is not the case.  Then you are on the news all the time, and get the choice appointments.  But if Hillary was a Republican and not the wife of a former President, she would be just another Freshman.  Then we would see her as much as we see maybe Mary Bono.  I have not seen Mary since her speach during the Impeachment hearings.

http://i.cnn.net/cnn/2004/US/02/07/sept11.commission.ap/vert.condi.rice.ap.jpg

The big lips thing in these cartoons are meant to sterotype black people.  Again if this was the right we would be called racist and bigots in a heartbeat.
My lips are bigger than hers(at least my upper one is)and I'm white/Eurasian.so go figure.Cheers!

My lips are bigger than hers(at least my upper one is)and I'm white/Eurasian.so go figure.Cheers!


I'm still wondering what's with the horns  ;)

Ya know, I can see the stereotyping. It is rather tasteless. But it seems like you're just trying to create as many political pity parties for yourself and your views as you can. "If the right did this..." "See what happens when you can't spank a child?". Just stick to arguing the points.