Of the picture of the voter with the Obama-Curious George tee shirt, a reader writes:Scott, for what's it worth as a moderate GOPer, I think this kind of crap is out of place in America.
But then, I thought that same thing when I saw HRC and CodePink posters being carried in DC back in 2004 with pictures of W kissing KarlRove or pictures of Laura Bush with slogans like "You can't trust her! She killed her childhood friend!"
It has no place in American politics.
Well, first, the Curious George slur.
It saddened me. That someone would vote against Obama because of his race or his supposed religion is galling. That a voter would proudly tout a racist image was painful to see. But it is her right to express her political opinions as she see fit, even if it offends me -- and it does.
But as sad as it makes me, it's her right to say it (just as it's my right to ridicule and mock it).
Regarding the HRC pictures:
It's not how I would choose to express my grievances with the Bush Administration. But I'm not sure that I see it on the equal to the Obama smear. What is so offensive? A gay kiss? The disrespect? The cartoonish aspect?
Presidents have been disrespectfully mocked and pilloried in cartoons since the Republic began. I revere Abraham Lincoln -- yet in my office hang two prints of cartoons disrespectfully lampooning him. It goes with the territory.
Or maybe it's the idea of a gay kiss that offends you?
Look, any long-time reader of this blog knows I think the HRC is ineffective, and they blew it in 2004 with their George W you're fired campaign. But I'm curious Mich-Matt. Why are you so offended that you would seemingly ban those images from political discourse?
1 comment:
Scott, first off a slight correction... writing that an act(s) have no place in American politics is NOT equivalent to supporting a ban on those images in political discourse. You imply that my observation might reach to that level; it does not.
The constitutional right to free expression goes a long way into coarse and vulgar political expressions before it can't be tolerated.
I said they had no place in American politics; as in, they lower the standards of the public square when we should be working to re-engage civility and honest, constructive discussion.
Second, the problem with groups like CodePink and HRC using posters of W kissing Rove is that, I can't believe I have to make this clear to you, gays groups are using gay images to impune the character of a politician... the gay groups are using images depicting gay acts as if that's a tarnishing, demeaning act. In essence, they are thinking: "What's the worst we can do to make Bush and Rove look bad? Oh, I know, make 'em gay!"
Along with those images, we can toss in the posters of Mrs Bush and her teenage tragedy involving her best friend's death and spinning that into "Bush is a murderer". That is about as low as Obama the monkey eating a nana.
But all of those are way different than cartoons showing TeddieK approaching the pearly gates and seeing Mary Jo the angel waiting with a ticket to Hell for him in her hand. Why? Because it turns on a truthful moment in his life.
Thank you for your refresher course on the role of controversial images used against Mr Lincoln. My master thesis was on Lincoln's management of the Wigwam Convention in Chicago in 1860. I have 12 political cartoons involving Lincoln on the study's wall at home... but they're originals given to Greeley by the artists -not prints.
Post a Comment