Political Argument Arena!!!

[mplsTOON]

My question is… Had we used a black guy holding a gun, would any of you cry racism?

IMO depending on its context? maybe. Its a micro versus macro call. In my locality, if its was put out by a candidate (party affiliation does not matter IMHO) about the crime in North Minneapolis; I would say yes its racist, but with the caveat that its probably true because N MPLS (AKA "North Murderapolis") is majority African American who live below the poverty line and has the highest crime rate per capita in the Upper Midwest but also because it relies on a fear generated by a physical characteristic and that there are other ways to make the point without using a 20 pound hammer or even touching race if you would really think it through.

A hand with a gun is not visually arresting enough, as our society is based around guns and since we are "Sedated by" guns in our society, guns really no big deal, its the goon with the gun that is the big deal...

Putting my Art director's cap on I probably would look for a more "abstract" image that would convey the problem (Crime) in a way that really hits home, literally: an interior shot of a broken window with stuff obviously missing from the interior of the house; or a chalk outline of a body drawn by the police on a sidewalk right next to a chalk hopscotch board drawn by a child in front of a residential house.

No hint of race, nor gender, nor object. Just the effect and affect of the problem. Nice and subtle...but nobody likes subtlety these days especially when a perfectly good chainsaw can do the job of a scalpel in separating fact from fiction.:rolleyes:

OJ Simpson's and Barack Obama's image have been on the cover of Newsmagazines and have had the "curves adjusted" in PS to "make them look "Blacker". Was that a racist Art Director or was that done to sell magazines?

[mplsTOON]

So you disagree with his policy. You're not the first. I fail to see your criticism of his political decisions as showing any sign of a lack of intellect. Care to cite examples of situations that you feel a a much more "intellectual" President would have made a better decision.

His administration's disengagement policy toward the rest of the world unless you share his world view. His lack of nuance in negotiations wit ht rest of the world, his lack of accountability, delegation of authority, and his lack of follow up that his policies are carried out ethically.

His centralization of power and outright rejection of innovation and discovery of things outside his world view.

His failure to understand the complexities and interconnectedness of global market and economic patterns and the negative effects of that failure upon the "American Brand".

His inability to learn from failure.

His inability to understand applied policy and rely on dogma.

Simply put his admission that he is incurious and refuses to try and change that.


So you don't count his MBA? Is C not a passing grade? Of course it's not exemplary work but it's still getting an MBA from Harvard.

Never said I don't count his MBA.

I said the MBA does not impress me or reinforce his intellect. Its not the degree you get its how you get it and what you do with it that counts. If he did work hard he should have earned higher than a "C" and done more than just start a bunch of poor business ventures that he was bailed out of. Which brings me back to why he passed with only a "C"; was its his intellectual capacity? Was he too busy partying? Did he not apply himself? Did him being a Legacy and his father being a Senator help him out like it did in the Texas ANG?

I have high standards. I have very high standards for my leaders. W has never met my standards.

He has not driven himself thru life via discovery of opportunity and capitalization of it, he has sauntered, vaguely and incuriously thru it with little more than a care of WTF he was going.

[ToonUSA]

His administration's disengagement policy toward the rest of the world unless you share his world view. His lack of nuance in negotiations wit ht rest of the world, his lack of accountability, delegation of authority, and his lack of follow up that his policies are carried out ethically.

His centralization of power and outright rejection of innovation and discovery of things outside his world view.

His failure to understand the complexities and interconnectedness of global market and economic patterns and the negative effects of that failure upon the "American Brand".

His inability to learn from failure.

His inability to understand applied policy and rely on dogma.

Simply put his admission that he is incurious and refuses to try and change that.
I happen to share his world view for the most part, so I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this one.

As Reagan said, "America should never apologize for being strong."


Never said I don't count his MBA.

I said the MBA does not impress me or reinforce his intellect. Its not the degree you get its how you get it and what you do with it that counts. If he did work hard he should have earned higher than a "C" and done more than just start a bunch of poor business ventures that he was bailed out of. Which brings me back to why he passed with only a "C"; was its his intellectual capacity? Was he too busy partying? Did he not apply himself? Did him being a Legacy and his father being a Senator help him out like it did in the Texas ANG?

I have high standards. I have very high standards for my leaders. W has never met my standards.

He has not driven himself thru life via discovery of opportunity and capitalization of it, he has sauntered, vaguely and incuriously thru it with little more than a care of WTF he was going.
Clearly there's nothing I can say to change your view of him, so I'll leave it as it is.

[JaredSS07]

And on the lighter side...
-C9bkuJliMY

[ToonUSA]

Hillary on O'Reilly last night.

wJbyWBkf-t4

uQnQjV4sovE

It was part 1 of a 2 part interview with the 2nd part being tonight. Last night she spoke of her crusade for Universal Healthcare and on high oil prices.

I don't think O'Reilly hammered her enough when he cited she has voted 7 times against nuclear energy development and against ANWR drilling. She also proposed a windfall profit tax on the oil companies to help make up for the gas tax holiday she proposes. Now that's some socialist thinking if I've ever seen it. And taking on OPEC via the WTO? :rolleyes: Also love how she dodged the question of why Bill and Al didn't do anything about this 8 years or so ago. O'Reilly let her get out of that one.

To her credit she looked very relaxed and calm but her answers were pretty sub-par.

Tonight is foreign policy. That should be hilarious.

[BayernWake]

Pretty good interview all-around, I'd say. Has either Obama or McCain been on the Factor (I'm out of the loop over here in Austria)?

[ToonUSA]

Pretty good interview all-around, I'd say. Has either Obama or McCain been on the Factor (I'm out of the loop over here in Austria)?

McCain will be on next week.

Obama hasn't made any indication he'll go on the show. I think he knows O'Reilly will eat him alive with the Rev. Wright thing.

[tigerdave]

McCain will be on next week.

Obama hasn't made any indication he'll go on the show. I think he knows O'Reilly will eat him alive with the Rev. Wright thing.

Silly you, he already fulfilled his promise to go on FoxNews! Who cares if he went on a Sunday to one of the tamer shows, when no one was watching. :rolleyes:

[Russell1892]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/apr/28/television.barackobama

Charlie Brooker on the 24 hour news coverage. Just to give you a perspective from this side of the pond. You should know though that Brooker isn't a journalist... he's a misanthrope columnist writing firmly tongue in cheek.

It does nicely sum up the "what the f*ck?" element we all feel as you stagger towards electing your next leader... and he has a point about 24 hour news channels.

[tigerdave]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/apr/28/television.barackobama

Charlie Brooker on the 24 hour news coverage...and he has a point about 24 hour news channels.

Yeah, seriously. And we have four of them. Plus the three business channels and the 24-hour sports channel. :eek:

[ToonUSA]

Let's be fair. It's not all 24 hour continuous news. Most of the bulk is re-runs of shows that have aired throughout the day. Although whoever continues to allow this thing called "Red Eye" to continue to shoot new episodes on Fox News needs to be shot. Anyone that has ever been able to withstand 5 minutes of that show is a champion in my eyes. Mind numbing stupidity, to go along with the real question of necessity. Can't they just put an "Extenze" 1 hour informercial in it's stead?

[JaredSS07]

Conservatives crushed the Liberals... (http://news.sky.com/skynews/fixed_article/0,,91211-1314737,00.html)

http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d132/JaredSS07/image.jpg

[Toon³]

In short ******** Rangers I hope Zenit put 8 past those right wing tossers.:D

Rangers are right wing now are they? I guess that makes Celtic left wing....or how about it has nothing to do with left or right wing and you've just made an arse out of yourself by commenting on something you have no understanding of.

[Dirt McGirt]

Rangers are right wing now are they? I guess that makes Celtic left wing....or how about it has nothing to do with left or right wing and you've just made an arse out of yourself by commenting on something you have no understanding of.I don't like Rangers,their supporters, and what their club stands for, before talking your usual "know it all" (know nothing) line of bullshit ask me why I feel that way.

[Dirt McGirt]

http://www.phoenixcsc.com/image/tosser/rangers_nazi_salute_israel_2.jpg

The Ulster Hand or the Nazi salute either way Rangers can ******** off in my book.

It's funny that one can whine about their own manager playing defensive football but praise to the high heavens some second rate club from Scotland for playing ten times more ugly and negative football just to get a result. Guess what your doing it wrong.

[Toon³]

I don't like Rangers,their supporters, and what their club stands for, before talking your usual "know it all" (know nothing) line of bullshit ask me why I feel that way.

Why don't you like them and what do you think the club stands for?

[Toon³]

http://www.phoenixcsc.com/image/tosser/rangers_nazi_salute_israel_2.jpg

The Ulster Hand or the Nazi salute either way Rangers can ******** off in my book.

It's funny that one can whine about their own manager playing defensive football but praise to the high heavens some second rate club from Scotland for playing ten times more ugly and negative football just to get a result. Guess what your doing it wrong.

I think you'll find that the Hand of Ulster has it's roots in Gaelic culture and specifically in the area of Ulster who use it as a symbol on the flag of this area. Ulster just happens to be an extremely protestant area and thus this symbol was taken up by the loyalists. Too this day it is still used by the shared power assmebly is Northern Ireland and is on the flag that was chosen by both loyalists and republicans. Try to know even just a tiny thing about the subject your talking about before you post nonsense like that.

As for the "nazi salute", they sure do look like hardcore nazi's with the Israeli flag hanging right at the front......


As for the football, guess what your doing wrong. Did Newcastle get good results by playing repetative negative football? No. Did Rangers get to the UEFA cup final by player negative defensive football against superior teams? Yes

Taa daa!

[ToonUSA]

I don't like Rangers,their supporters, and what their club stands for, before talking your usual "know it all" (know nothing) line of bullshit ask me why I feel that way.

Do you feel the same way about Celtic?

vFtKuFAt6vk

gOwqWQS8oRY

[Dirt McGirt]

What's Celtic got to do with anything?

Toon3 didn't like my crack about "right wing tossers" in regard to some of (most?) Ranger's FC supporters and basically said "I don't know what I'm talking about as I'm a plastic footie fan". My response was in essence "you're full of shit as usual if you think Rangers aren't supported by an ultra right wing element."

Really it seems like case closed now.

Clarification Toon3. Big Sam had the Toon in one spot better in the table when he left then we sit at present and the scum Rangers supporter's fly the Israeli Flag to counter Pro-PLO elements in the IRA.

I don't want to keep talking about it but I hope to see Zenit demolish the anti football garbage Walter Smith has put out for consumption in the UEFA Cup.

Also Bolton 2-0 over the mackems. :D

[Toon³]

I never said anything about you being a plastic football fan, simply you do not know what your talking about in relation to Rangers. You seem to have mistaken the Rangers supporters being in favour of continuted Northern Irish association with the United Kingdom as some "ultra nationalist right wing" sect. When it is nothing like that at all. They support Northern Ireland being part of the United Kingdom and this does not make them right wing at all. I think you should probably understand politics before you actually start to comment on something you have no understanding of.

If Rangers are right wing, does thing mean that Celtic are left wing? I don't see them adovcating anything left wing at all, because infact you have actually decided to mix politics in with what is essentially a religous arguement.

So they fly the flag of Israeli flag to count PLO sympathies in within the Celtic fans...not only is this the first ANYONE has heard of this but it sort of ********s up your arguement of the Rangers fans giving the Nazi salute in the fuzzy picture you posted.

Let me get this right...Rangers fans are anti Israel and they only fly the Israeli flag because they are anti PLO.....yeah this makes complete sense.