Search
Home  |   About  |   Q & A  |   Archives  |   Credits  |   Contact  |  
« Rep. Jonathan Paton (R — AZ) to Serve in Iraq with Army Reserves
Court Rules that Tom Delay Must Remain on Ballot »

Jane Hamsher “Blackfaces” Senator Lieberman

What the hell is the matter with Jane Hamsher? And what the hell is it with Democrats repeatedly using blackface to attack their Republican counterparts?

Thankfully not all Liberals are as stupid or as contemptable as Jane Hamsher, as many on the Left have condemned her for publishing this image of Sen. Joe Lieberman in blackface.

Steve M, a considerbaly-Leftwing blogger at Rogerailes, writes:

Lefty bloggers: Can we please just fucking stop with the blackface?

(That used to be here.)

Think of it as a new corollary to Godwin’s Law: Any use of blackface, like any use of the word “Nazi,” automatically makes further reasoned discussion impossible.

I don’t care if it’s fair. I don’t care if the use of blackface is clever or ironic; I don’t care if the blogger or the Photoshopper is African-American. Posting blackface is handing the other side a huge fucking trump card, one they can (and will) run gleefully off to the mainstream media with. It’s just never worth it.

That’s about the most reasoned and smartest thing I’ve read by anyone — regardless of what side of the political aisle they plant their butt. And I agree — blackface has become the new Nazi in political rhetoric coming from the Left.
_____________________

Hamsher is such a puppet. She’s been forced to try and cover her (and her boy Ned’s) asses. Hamsher has issued an aplogy. Sort of. Well, actually, what she really did was blame Republican bloggers (calling out Michelle Malkin by name):

I sincerely apologize to anyone who was genuinely offended by the choice of images accompanying my blog post today on the Huffington Post. It’s also important to note that I do not, nor have I ever worked for Ned Lamont’s campaign. However, at their request, I removed the image earlier today.

Unfortunately, Senator Lieberman’s campaign has used this in attempt to hurt Ned and score political points, mustering their own faux indignation in attempt to further distract from the issues important to the voters of Connecticut…

…To the extent that rightwing Republicans like Michelle Malkin are trying to harm Ned Lamont with this ginned up controversy by “defending” his opponent with these absurd charges of racism — I regret it and I invite them to take it up with the person who did it, namely me. I answer to nobody and I operate entirely on my own volition. If you have a problem with something I’ve written, you know where to find me.

So, which is it Jane? Do you answer to nobody? Or do you jump when Ned snaps his fingers? (That’s a rhetorical question, Jane, since the now-removed image shows exactly which it is. Jump, little moonbat, jump!) Yeah. You’re nobody’s bitch. Except for Ned’s.

Here’s a reminder of the last time a liberal blogger published a Photoshop with blackface:

Posted by Robbie Cooper on Thursday, August 3rd, 2006 | Trackback |

8 Responses to “Jane Hamsher “Blackfaces” Senator Lieberman”

And what the hell is it with Democrats repeatedly using blackface to attack their Republican counterparts?

Joe Lieberman: honorary Republican.

(Probably not what his campaign is looking for as they worry about being trounced in a Democratic primary)

Left by Preston on August 3rd, 2006 at 10:00 am

Damn…busted me leaking the not-so-secret secret that Sen. Lieberman is really a Republican operative in the Democratic Party.

Kinda’ like Sen Arlen Specter working as a Democrat opperative in the Republican party.

Left by Robbie on August 3rd, 2006 at 10:07 am

Call me dense but I don’t understand what Joe Lieberman in blackface has to do with the article that Jane Hamscher wrote. As a result it seems more like static than something offensive to me.

Not even Malkin specifically explains why this is offensive. I understand why Michael Steele would take offense at the characterization of him in blackface but what does it mean for a white person? And Clinton?

You’ll have to spell it out. (and it’s a cop out just to say that if the GOP did it that the NAACP would protest.)

Left by Preston on August 3rd, 2006 at 11:08 am

read more | add new comment | source | full article | [IMG delicious] | [IMG technorati]

Left by austinsnews.net | Calibrating for hype on August 3rd, 2006 at 4:25 pm

Though I am in general appalled at the way the one issue Anti-War Left has gone after Liebermann, I have to admit, I think that photo is hilarious myself.

Left by Patrick Kelley on August 4th, 2006 at 9:42 pm

Incidentally, it’s not one issue that has brought down Senator Lieberman. There are, of course, many Democrats who voted for the war authorization resolution and are member in good standing with the party: Clinton, Edwards, Kerry…

Focusing on the war ignores that Lieberman supported the GOP in the decision to interfere with Terri Schiavo’s life; access to emergency contraception; the awful bankruptcy bill; the Alito confirmations and a handful of other important issues. The real sin however, is that in any decision he makes that departs from the party line he uses for an opportunity for self-aggrandizement over the party. This is self-destructive behavior. If you belive in the agenda of a party enough to call yourself a member you should not be constantly questioning the principles of the party. If Lieberman doesn’t like the Democratic Party he is free to leave.

Left by Preston on August 4th, 2006 at 11:49 pm

All that is true, and I agree with a lot of it, in particular his support of the bankruptcy bill. Still, if it wasn’t for his support of the war, none of this would have been going on. It’s his war stance that has brought it about, all the other is just window dressing.

Also, despite his other conservative stances, he does vote more often with the Democrats, it is just not as widely publicized or debated. I read somewhere that a liberal group gave him a better than eighty percent ranking in voting for liberal issues.

By the same token, according to Lanny Davis, LaMont has openly bragged about voting with the conservative Republicans in his state eighty percent of the time. Davis was talking about this on C-Span with the editor of The Nation, a woman named Van DenHeuval (?), who supports LaMont. He mentioned this several times but she never responded to the charge.

Left by Patrick Kelley on August 5th, 2006 at 8:50 am

Sure, I agree that without the war issue Lieberman would be safe. What’s wrong with that? The people of Connecticut have the right to be represented by someone who reflects their values and currently CT residents oppose the decision to invade Iraq by about 2-1.

About Lieberman’s voting: it is true that by the scorecards of interest groups his voting record is reasonably progressive. However, it is easy to suspect he is gaming the system with his refusal to support progressive bills at key junctures but then providing his vote at the final vote where the scorecards are tallied. This behavior occured in the Alito confirmations where he opposed filibuster and the bankruptcy bill where he voted for cloture- the only opportunity to stop the bill. In the end though his vote was tallied as ‘progressive’.

More than that his parading on Fox News as a ‘reasonable Democrat’ has earned him the enmity of the left.

If it turns out that Lamont is more conservative than Lieberman it would be an ironic twist. But I wouldn’t count on it.

Left by Preston on August 6th, 2006 at 11:01 am

Got something you want to say?

Quicktags:


Notes:

You have 10 minutes after you submit your comment to edit it. Simply click the E(dit) link above the countdown-counter at the bottom of your comment. You can only edit a comment from the same IP address from where the original comment was submitted.

If your comment does not appear immediately, it has been sent to the moderation queue for approval.

Your comment either contained more than 2 hyperlinks, or it used a word(s) that are on my Spam blacklist. Comments awaiting moderation will usually be approved within a day.

And, being that it's my blog and all...I reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time.