• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Do you think this is offensive? [W:51]

Is this offensive

  • Yes it is, but Al Sharpton is a douche

    Votes: 5 17.9%
  • No, Al Sharpton is a douche

    Votes: 20 71.4%
  • Yes, and Al Sharpton is not a douche

    Votes: 3 10.7%
  • #4 with a smile

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    28
Moderator's Warning:
All attacks will result in infractions and thread bans from this point forward. Post wisely.
 
Cartoons, as with comedy, are only effective when they parrot reality and bring discomfort to the forefront. Had the jury verdict gone the other way, we might have seen a similar cartoon with the six female jurors as the lynchers. Cartoons and comedy are great ways to embarrass people and point out how other people see their actions - it might help them to temper their actions in the future.

As for the cartoon itself, I'm not the slightest bit offended except for the fact that the horse looks a little dopey - no noble steed, that one.

It would be nice to know why the left and blacks' disrespect of the all female jury's verdict isn't seen by the media and others for what it is, a war on white women.
 
Yeah...police make judgments all the time based on the fact. I'm fine with that in most circumstances from car accidents to other instances.

When a death is involved...there should be more scrutiny. Once again...I guess I'm the crazy person here.



Very lame talking point. As if anybody thinks that conservatives care about poor black people in Chicago. The liberal coalition including the vast majority of blacks have been trying to alleviate the effects of poverty in black communities for decades...and conservatives have been fighting those policies for decades.
Yep...well...your words...not mine...
 
I think it is. Portraying a black man as a KKK member is like portraying Netanyahu in a Nazi uniform, IMO. There may be a valid point, but....

The cartoonist has a right to make his point, but I have a right to say that it's offensive.

You don't get it.

It's drawing a parallel between how the NAACP is behaving with how the KKK behaves toward race issues. . . using this as an example.

He's saying they're behaving the SAME WAY.
 
I think it is. Portraying a black man as a KKK member is like portraying Netanyahu in a Nazi uniform, IMO. There may be a valid point, but....

The cartoonist has a right to make his point, but I have a right to say that it's offensive.
In all honestly, it's too stupid, illogical and poorly drawn to be offensive to me, LOL.
 
You must have missed the part where the cartoon is depicting the responses AFTER the trial...

I guess I also missed the part where Holder, Sharpton, the NAACP, and the democratic party called for a lynching. :roll:

Maybe because it never happened
 
I simply don't look at it as being racist. If one is black, perhaps one would. I'm not. It's using well-known symbolism to make a point: where Zimmerman is concerned, the oppressed have become the oppressors. The tables have turned.

How are the parties depicted in the cartoon (ie Holder, Sharpton, the NAACP, and the Democratic Party) oppressing Zimmerman?
 
I've seen photoshops of Clarence Thomas with a KKK hood on recently.

Thankfully not on THIS forum.
 
I think it is. Portraying a black man as a KKK member is like portraying Netanyahu in a Nazi uniform, IMO. There may be a valid point, but....

The cartoonist has a right to make his point, but I have a right to say that it's offensive.

It's the plain truth. It can only be offensive to those who hate the truth. I didn't need this thread to know that the OP falls solidly into that category; that's been obvious for quite some time.
 
I guess I also missed the part where Holder, Sharpton, the NAACP, and the democratic party called for a lynching. :roll:

Maybe because it never happened
Hanging from a tree, jailed for life even after having a trial and exoneration...

Just degrees of the same despicable acts.
 
Offensive? Not for a political cartoon. I see is as cheesy and trivializing the brutality against African-Americans when the KKK ruled - and in much of the country it did including controlling/being local government and law enforcement.
 
Comparing the KKK to the NAACP.

Up next, abortion clinics are the new concentration camps.

All this and more on Desperate Conservatives.
 
I hadn't noticed the NAACP on a robe. Yeah, I think that's offensive, but its a political cartoon, which are generally greatly overstated and insulting towards someone.
 
I think it is. Portraying a black man as a KKK member is like portraying Netanyahu in a Nazi uniform, IMO. There may be a valid point, but....

The cartoonist has a right to make his point, but I have a right to say that it's offensive.
The only thing that picture is missing is the media.Seeing how the yellow journalism of the media basically threw fuel onto the fire.
 
Yes, asking for a trial and asking for a lynching are *exactly* the same! :roll:
Not getting the point which goes to the whole 'deliberately' thing...

They GOT a trial...a trial they shouldnt have had because those that know the case and the system believed a trial wasnt warranted. they GOT a trial. they 'lost'. Now they want the fed to come in with some new charges.
 
Not getting the point which goes to the whole 'deliberately' thing...

They GOT a trial...a trial they shouldnt have had because those that know the case and the system believed a trial wasnt warranted. they GOT a trial. they 'lost'. Now they want the fed to come in with some new charges.

Because asking for a trial and asking for a lynching are exactly the same! :lamo
 
I think it is. Portraying a black man as a KKK member is like portraying Netanyahu in a Nazi uniform, IMO. There may be a valid point, but....

The cartoonist has a right to make his point, but I have a right to say that it's offensive.

 
It's offensive to some but not others; depends on your point of view on the issue. It's political satire at best and at worst a tasteless way to flame the heated passions driving the issue.
 
Because asking for a trial and asking for a lynching are exactly the same! :lamo

Still not getting the point which goes to that whole "deliberate" thing...

Never said the end result was the same. But the actions? You bet.
 
I think it is. Portraying a black man as a KKK member is like portraying Netanyahu in a Nazi uniform, IMO. There may be a valid point, but....

The cartoonist has a right to make his point, but I have a right to say that it's offensive.

I don't find it offensive, Sharpton is the equivalent to a klan member.
 
I think it is. Portraying a black man as a KKK member is like portraying Netanyahu in a Nazi uniform, IMO. There may be a valid point, but....

The cartoonist has a right to make his point, but I have a right to say that it's offensive.
Yes. I do think Sharpton, Holder, and the democrats in general are attempting to lynch George Zimmerman and it is offensive. Not too sure how much the NAACP had to do with it though. I don't often agree with NAACP on policy, but on the whole, I think they are a less corrupt organization than the democrat party.
 
Some are offended, but by no means all, obviously. Not all as it is depicting something that needs be said…even if this may, does in my mind, in a limited way, go too far…

It’s been the argument in other topic debates here at DP that using the exaggeration in analogy [especially specific overstatements] is never appropriate…some of us others think an analogy’s use is to embellish almost to hyperbole for the purpose of quick identification of realizing of similarities of the conceptual path… primarily to prompt instant awareness of what is at the core intended to be conveyed. Intelligent people gain instant cognizance while appropriately discounting the amplification… Trouble may occur with those undereducatedly ignorant of the overstated portrayal as well as its actual placement on the totem of genuine reality.

One consideration ought also be to decide how far towards the lowest common denominator should one go… should one direct all towards an eighth grade audience? Sixth grade next? Fourth?

In doing so, how much is lost of meaning, of the more profound truth is succumbing to what would become more of a child’s reality?

Instead maybe expect more of our fellow citizens to strive just a bit to understand, to learn further so as to give more proper context? Is this not the minimum duty of each citizen in a Republic? It may only offend the uninformed or the oversensitive… yet being oblivious and/or thin-skinned, like being offended, is certainly not against the law.

Some have the audacity to use the call for "justice" to overturn a jury’s verdict; others have the right, and an obligation, to also be bold enough to call them on it.

To me there was little doubt in the attempted railroading of Zimmerman pretrial, from the time after media got hold of it… and we have certainly seen it post trial… With these attempts [ however minor its role as it is the principle that is in play ] by the Federal Government to get involved, while not unprecedented, this involvement does not appear even handed with an eye towards the required blindness of justice. It seems, to my mind, to be more than hypothetically racially motivated on the side of Martin … contra Zimmerman.

This cartoon portrayal being ostensibly not inaccurate at core, though perhaps to some going over the top… what, for a cartoonist, might be the better method of conveyance of this injustice? Especially since so many of even the more informed here do not even see the similarities in the principle that a man of bi-racial background identified initially as white but now of Latino lineage having the steamroller of many of the loudest faces in their own an attempt to overstep justice in justice’s name…at looking at things only in terms of race.

One also has to wonder where the Hispanic counterparts to the Jesse Jackons and Sharptons are in defense of their own guy? Especially in the wake of the partiality of the President’s comments and the Justice Department apparently taking sides fairly early on.
 
Still not getting the point that a trial is not a lynching
Stil not getting the point that they already got a trial they shouldnt have gotten in the first place, lost, and are now insisting the fed go after him. They may not hang him from a tree, but if Holder goes after him, it is a lynching nonetheless.
 
Back
Top Bottom