The Obama Monkey Cartoon

On February 18th, 2009, the New York Post published a cartoon, which I call racist, of two white cops shooting at a monkey and the caption says:
"They'll have to find someone else to write the next Stimulus Bill."
This cartoon angered many people-black and white, including myself. I felt that the New York Post was very wrong for letting this cartoon appear in their newspaper. The author and editor of the cartoon reasons that his cartoon is supposed to be comical, mocking the incident of a woman who recently got mauled by her own chimpanzee, and Washington's weak efforts of trying to revive the economy. They also tried to say that Al Sharpton who is an activist, is a "publicity oppurtunist" for trying to point the cartoon at racism toward Barack Obama. For some reason I do not believe anything of what he has mentioned and mocking the woman who almost died because of the attack by her own chimpanzee is not funny at all. I remember many times from the past, but not too long ago, when Blacks were compared to monkeys/chimpanzees/apes. Upon my research, I have also found a white supporter of Palin at her rally waving around a stuffed monkey calling him "little Hussein" also known as Obama. He flaunts the monkey and laughs while several protesters yell "racist!" at him. This really bothers me because it makes me think twice if the importance of race has really transcended.

You must take a look at these:
Here is the link to the video of the man at Palin's rally: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bKUovpF9LWU / http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NtZWwgw__WY

Here is the link to the actual cartoon: http://blogs.thetimes.co.za/minor/2009/02/19/racist-obama-monkey-cartoon/

Thought that I should post this from Wikipedia.org:
Racism is the belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race. People with racist beliefs might hate certain groups of people according to their racial groups.

Hearts Day: honor to Toni Morrison

On Friday February 13th I attended the Hearts Day conference. I watched the second session of the day and did not really find it quite interesting. I was actually confused and did not really understand the purpose of my session even though the flier said it was supposed to be "Approaches to her fiction." I do not think everything was quite clear and well expresssed. I did get something out of this session and it was on the topic of motherhood referring to her novel, "The Bluest Eye." In the novel, the mother was not emotionally attaching herself to her children. The message of the book was that women and men can sometimes accept a better image of themselves if nutured by their mother and father figure. I believe this point is true because the nuturing of your parents is like a feeling of support and love, which is something that every person wants and needs in their life.

Change or No Change?-intro to 1st eng. paper on borders

According to Gloria Anzaldua in Borderlands/La Frontera, we live in a society that divides communities based on imposed standards that are different from those of whom are the ‘legitimate inhabitants--the whites.’ She also mentions that these boundaries are something that is “unnatural.” A border is a division, boundary, or barrier between two or more objects, in this case between different races/ethnic backgrounds. In Gloria’s story, she refers to the U.S. - Mexican border and explaining how Mexicans who inhabit these borderlands are treated as “aliens” and “trespassers.” They are treated this way based on their appearance, race, and ethnicity. Similarly, in the 1960s, people of color-mainly blacks, were always known to be at the bottom of the racial hierarchy of America being denied of many of their rights. In the year of 2009, many Americans, especially the media, believed that President Barack Obama has erased the racial barrier within the U.S. being the first African American president. Even the N.Y. Times calls this historic event a “breakthrough.” However, many people still feel that things have not changed within America’s racial boundary since Barack Obama is now president of the U.S. Instead, America’s racial boundary between Caucasians and people of color have not been erased, but is gradually disappearing. It is gradually disappearing because Obama‘s election shows that he was not chosen based on race, there are new opportunities for African Americans, the involvement of more diverse young adults in politics, and the definition of an American is changing.

Rev. Lowery's speech during inauguration

On January 20th, 2009, Rev. Lowery welcomed Barack Obama to the presidency with a speech and prayer. Here's an excerpt that stood out the most:
"We ask you to help us work for that day when black will not be asked to give back, when brown can stick around, when yellow will be mellow, when the red man can get ahead, man, and when white will embrace what is right."
I could not find any information of where this statement originally came from, so I will speak on the different views including my own on his speech. This comment stirred a lot of controversy over whether the statement above was racist toward Caucasians. Was the reverend right for making this statement? What does he really mean by this statement? Should we read this message literally or figuratively? Well, I was reading some blogs and many people feel like this statement was pointing the finger at Caucasians for not doing what is thought to be right. People that share this viewpoint believe that as a whole Americans should learn to do what is right and not just the ones who were pointed out. I noticed that most of the people who thought this comment was racist were Caucasian. The other viewpoint of this situation is that the comment is not racist and he was just singing the lyrics of an old song. They feel that if Caucasians know in their heart they have not done something wrong, then they should not be offended by this comment. My viewpoint is totally out of the box and does not agree with either side because I would rather have a conversation with this man in order to clarify his speech for everyone. I believe being that this man is 87 years old and was president of SCLC he has witnessed plenty of things during the 50s and 60s that none of us born recently could even imagine. Thus, his view comes from a different perspective and he is not going to easily forget the things he has witnessed. That is what I think, but what do you honestly believe?...Please do not be ignorant..think before you write something with no meaning.
P.S. I read most of the viewpoints of this situation on the CNN website.