(12-23-2020 05:01 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(12-23-2020 04:57 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(12-23-2020 04:15 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  There is a subset of Trump supporters (the MAGA-hat wearers if you will) that are eager to lap up everything no matter how questionable that DJT sends their way.

Wonderful use of stereotypes, 93.

You disagree that this subset exists? You should drive out to West Texas and meet some of my relatives.

(12-23-2020 05:09 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(12-23-2020 05:07 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  The first mention of Nazis and antisemitism was in post 183 from 93.

The first mention was the video that you brought to our attention. Are you gaslighting us, OO???

*edit* Post 182. Here is the caption that accompanied your video:

Quote:The Washington Post is accused of 'anti-Semitic Nazi propaganda' over a political cartoon depicting Republicans as rats; Fox News contributor Joe Concha reacts on 'Fox & Friends.'

(12-23-2020 05:07 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  The first mention of Nazis and antisemitism was in post 183 from 93. I mentioned "hate", and I guess he thinks that is code for racism.

No.

I think there is a class of people who hate conservatives (sorry, 93, I don't know what kinds of hats they wear) and I think those people will have a lot more power to exercise that hate after January 20.

Hate can be be about other things than racism, 93.

(12-23-2020 04:47 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(12-23-2020 04:34 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(12-23-2020 03:49 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(12-23-2020 01:52 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(12-23-2020 12:30 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  See bolded. I wasn't talking about the astronaut comment.

Not butthurt at all - I didn't remember someone saying that, to be honest. But the rest of the comment is exactly the tactic Tanq uses - painting someone's response with the assumption that there is not more to it. Further detail on the thought wasn't provided because I didn't happen to include it, but not because more thought didn't exist.

And are you, at the end, saying that rats are always Nazi imagery? Because that's what it seems like, and I want to be on the same page before I respond.

Not at all. I cannot see why you would have any confusion, but IAC I will repeat for you.

Rats are almost always negative imagery (Ratatouille being an exception, a few others), and the Nazis as well as many other people including that cartoonist used that negative imagery to their own ends. Might as well say it is sailor imagery (rats leaving a sinking ship) or gangster imagery (You dirty rat) or Internal Affairs Cop imagery (Rat Squad) or medieval castle imagery. The imagery is as old as cities, maybe older. The Nazis neither invented or owned it. The cartoonist neither invented or owned it. Both used it to denigrate peoples they didn't like and had an agenda against.

Obviously the cartoonist meant to imply something by using rats - it's whether or not there is reason to believe that use reasonably implied anti-semitism is the question.

But the simple act of denigrating people that political cartoonist don't like or have an agenda against isn't really an act worth discussing. Cartoonist have been doing that for decades, if not centuries.

It's when the cartoonists cross the line into racist tropes that there is a problem. The link you provided sent me to a video, and I haven't watched it. I've seen the cartoon though, and it doesn't seem to be racist off the cuff. Were some of the people presented as rats Jewish? Were they depicted differently than the other rat images?

So dehumanizing and hateful tropes are okey dokey up until they implicate racial features. Sounds like one awesome fun world in the lad household. lmfao.

I’m asking where that line is - obviously there is one. Are all instances of humans being depicted as animals dehumanizing and hateful?

(12-23-2020 05:25 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(12-23-2020 05:09 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(12-23-2020 05:07 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  The first mention of Nazis and antisemitism was in post 183 from 93.

The first mention was the video that you brought to our attention. Are you gaslighting us, OO???

*edit* Post 182. Here is the caption that accompanied your video:

Quote:The Washington Post is accused of 'anti-Semitic Nazi propaganda' over a political cartoon depicting Republicans as rats; Fox News contributor Joe Concha reacts on 'Fox & Friends.'

I see where you went astray. I had the sound muted and all I saw was the banner saying "WAPO cartoon depicts lawmakers as rats".(NOT the later banner you suggest). I guess the mention of nazis sent your SJW knee jerking.

Still, my intent was clear to anybody he cared to discern: The hate I was talking about was the leftist hate for anybody "with" Trump. Still is what I am talking about.

(12-23-2020 05:01 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(12-23-2020 04:57 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(12-23-2020 04:15 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  There is a subset of Trump supporters (the MAGA-hat wearers if you will) that are eager to lap up everything no matter how questionable that DJT sends their way.

Wonderful use of stereotypes, 93.

You disagree that this subset exists? You should drive out to West Texas and meet some of my relatives.

(12-23-2020 05:26 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(12-23-2020 05:07 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  The first mention of Nazis and antisemitism was in post 183 from 93. I mentioned "hate", and I guess he thinks that is code for racism.

No.

I think there is a class of people who hate conservatives (sorry, 93, I don't know what kinds of hats they wear) and I think those people will have a lot more power to exercise that hate after January 20.

Hate can be be about other things than racism, 93.

Thanks for the lesson, dad, but I'm feeling like you don't even read/watch your morning links. You have acted confused/angry/bewildered that Lad and I have responded to anti-semitism when that is exactly the issue that your link discussed. You don't comment much on your morning links beyond "Look guys... the left sucks" which is why we have to assume that the provided link is what you consider important.

Please go back and look at your own link and see if you can understand why I brought up anti-semitism and Nazi imagery in response to it.

(12-23-2020 05:28 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(12-23-2020 05:25 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(12-23-2020 05:09 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(12-23-2020 05:07 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  The first mention of Nazis and antisemitism was in post 183 from 93.

The first mention was the video that you brought to our attention. Are you gaslighting us, OO???

*edit* Post 182. Here is the caption that accompanied your video:

Quote:The Washington Post is accused of 'anti-Semitic Nazi propaganda' over a political cartoon depicting Republicans as rats; Fox News contributor Joe Concha reacts on 'Fox & Friends.'

I see where you went astray. I had the sound muted and all I saw was the banner saying "WAPO cartoon depicts lawmakers as rats".(NOT the later banner you suggest). I guess the mention of nazis sent your SJW knee jerking.

Still, my intent was clear to anybody he cared to discern: The hate I was talking about was the leftist hate for anybody "with" Trump. Still is what I am talking about.

You provided a link to a video that you didn't even bother to listen to? Cool cool.

(12-23-2020 05:26 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(12-23-2020 04:47 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(12-23-2020 04:34 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(12-23-2020 03:49 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(12-23-2020 01:52 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Not at all. I cannot see why you would have any confusion, but IAC I will repeat for you.

Rats are almost always negative imagery (Ratatouille being an exception, a few others), and the Nazis as well as many other people including that cartoonist used that negative imagery to their own ends. Might as well say it is sailor imagery (rats leaving a sinking ship) or gangster imagery (You dirty rat) or Internal Affairs Cop imagery (Rat Squad) or medieval castle imagery. The imagery is as old as cities, maybe older. The Nazis neither invented or owned it. The cartoonist neither invented or owned it. Both used it to denigrate peoples they didn't like and had an agenda against.

Obviously the cartoonist meant to imply something by using rats - it's whether or not there is reason to believe that use reasonably implied anti-semitism is the question.

But the simple act of denigrating people that political cartoonist don't like or have an agenda against isn't really an act worth discussing. Cartoonist have been doing that for decades, if not centuries.

It's when the cartoonists cross the line into racist tropes that there is a problem. The link you provided sent me to a video, and I haven't watched it. I've seen the cartoon though, and it doesn't seem to be racist off the cuff. Were some of the people presented as rats Jewish? Were they depicted differently than the other rat images?

So dehumanizing and hateful tropes are okey dokey up until they implicate racial features. Sounds like one awesome fun world in the lad household. lmfao.

I’m asking where that line is - obviously there is one. Are all instances of humans being depicted as animals dehumanizing and hateful?

Actually no, you arent asking. You were stating that was the key and important differential above. Now you are on to your next nuanced tap dance move?

(12-23-2020 05:35 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  I think I have explained MY intents and MY thoughts to the nth degree here, so please stop telling me what I meant and what I think.

I am sorry the FOX guy linked the use of rat imagery to nazi propaganda. Clearly he was wrong, and nazis did not ever depict their targets as rats, and nobody else has ever depicted their targets as rats, and rats are nice animals, loved throughout the world. The cartoon was meant to send out love to the conservatives of the world, no hate intended.

(12-23-2020 05:36 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(12-23-2020 05:26 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(12-23-2020 04:47 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(12-23-2020 04:34 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(12-23-2020 03:49 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Obviously the cartoonist meant to imply something by using rats - it's whether or not there is reason to believe that use reasonably implied anti-semitism is the question.

But the simple act of denigrating people that political cartoonist don't like or have an agenda against isn't really an act worth discussing. Cartoonist have been doing that for decades, if not centuries.

It's when the cartoonists cross the line into racist tropes that there is a problem. The link you provided sent me to a video, and I haven't watched it. I've seen the cartoon though, and it doesn't seem to be racist off the cuff. Were some of the people presented as rats Jewish? Were they depicted differently than the other rat images?

So dehumanizing and hateful tropes are okey dokey up until they implicate racial features. Sounds like one awesome fun world in the lad household. lmfao.

I’m asking where that line is - obviously there is one. Are all instances of humans being depicted as animals dehumanizing and hateful?

Actually no, you arent asking. You were stating that was the key and important differential above. Now you are on to your next nuanced tap dance move?

Yes, I did not explicitly ask it, but the post clearly focused on that question.

Quote:Why do you abhor discrepancy so much?

Quote:Is everything truly binary in your view?

Quote: If so, it sounds like calling or depicting anyone as a rat is off limits in Tanq world.

(12-23-2020 05:26 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  Thanks for the lesson, dad,

(12-23-2020 09:14 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  The truly amazing thing is that for the last four years, we have been told that Donald Trump is the reason why political discourse has declined to new depths of coarseness, even by some involved in this thread.

So when a cartoon appears that depicts Republicans as rats, the screams of defense in this thread of the properness of that particular political discourse comes from none other than those who have repeatedly and continually sermonized the first sentence.

In fing credible.

Followed by one calling another poster derogatorily 'dad'. Awesome job there......

(12-24-2020 02:23 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(12-23-2020 09:14 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  The truly amazing thing is that for the last four years, we have been told that Donald Trump is the reason why political discourse has declined to new depths of coarseness, even by some involved in this thread.

So when a cartoon appears that depicts Republicans as rats, the screams of defense in this thread of the properness of that particular political discourse comes from none other than those who have repeatedly and continually sermonized the first sentence.

In fing credible.

Followed by one calling another poster derogatorily 'dad'. Awesome job there......

See my responses above, Tanq. I didn't argue that the cartoon wasn't hateful (in fact, I explicitly said that it was). I didn't defend the content of the cartoon. I said that I didn't find it anti-Semitic. That was what I thought OO was implying based on his posting the link to the video. I don't know why I even respond because, as usual, you will ignore what I said so that you can denigrate what you pretend I said. Par for the course.

In terms of my derogatory use of "dad"... it was after OO sermonized (nice word) to me the fact that one can draw an distinction between hate and racism. This is after his posting of a video that decried the use of Nazi imagery and subsequently his going crazy on us for discussing whether or not the cartoon used Nazi imagery. If I had to do it over I would have not been uncivil with him but it was a pretty annoying discussion TBH.

It's quite something that the most uncivil poster (by far) on this forum is the first lose it on us the moment that we dip our toes into the pool of incivility.

(12-24-2020 02:23 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  I didn't defend the content of the cartoon. I said that I didn't find it anti-Semitic. That was what I thought OO was implying based on his posting the link to the video. I don't know why I even respond because, as usual, you will ignore what I said so that you can denigrate what you pretend I said. Par for the course.

(12-24-2020 02:23 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  It's quite something that the most uncivil poster (by far) on this forum is the first lose it on us the moment that we dip our toes into the pool of incivility.