Ann Richards, I believe.
Actually, Ann Richards said that George Bush, Sr., was born with a silver foot in his mouth. The “born on third” quip is usually attributed to Jim Hightower.
Actually, the Irish comparison is an interesting one. I teach US history to college students, and we talk quite a bit in class about the anti-Irish, anti-Catholic sentiment of the nineteenth century in the United States. Those Harper’s Weekly images are excellent examples of the way that the Irish were often represented during that period.
A key difference, it seems to me, is that anti-Irish prejudice (or racism or whatever you want to call it) is basically non-existent now in the United States, and has been for some time. The Irish have been assimilated and incorporated into the predominant white, Christian culture of America, a process that has been easier for them partly because they look like other white people.
If we ever arrive at a stage in our historical development when African Americans no longer suffer from racism and discrimination in the United States, then it could be that we will also arrive at a stage when it will be possible to compare an individual black man to a chimp without it being about race. That time has not yet come.
At least two different sources attribute the quote to football coach Barry Switzer, thought not in direct reference to GeeDub.
I’d like to point out that it’s also not, as far as I know, the case that some cabal of liberals got together, evaluated “Bush is a chimp” jokes, and officially game them the “yup, that’s OK” seal of approval.
Furthermore, did a democratic official of comparable rank ever spread those images? If not, the whole comparison is meaningless.
Obviously we’re all sick of “yeah, but your side did it too” type responses. But they’re even stupider than normal when they’re comparing statements made by party officials (although in this case, clearly not very high level ones) to random grumblings on the internet.
The Bush chimp tu quoque, while inevitable, is a non-starter. The monkey Bush imagery had nothing to do with his race, but was only a caricaturization of his physical appearance (and physical appearance jokes have always been fair game for Presidents). The Obama picture has nothing to do with his physical appearance, but is only a tired attempt to mock his perceived race. The monkey Bush jokes weren’t racist, the monkey Obama jokes are. This should be clear as a bell to any intellectually honest person.
[quote=“Diogenes_the_Cynic, post:86, topic:580320”]
The Bush chimp tu quoque, while inevitable, is a non-starter. The monkey Bush imagery had nothing to do with his race, but was only a caricaturization of his physical appearance (and physical appearance jokes have always been fair game for Presidents). The Obama picture has nothing to do with his physical appearance, but is only a tired attempt to mock his perceived race. The monkey Bush jokes weren’t racist, the monkey Obama jokes are. This should be clear as a bell to any intellectually honest person.[/QUOTE
It is also not clear to bigots.
I think it’s worth noting that, while the woman described in the OP is a member of the central committee of the Orange County Republican Party, the articles i read suggest that this is a voluntary position without much real power even within the Party itself.
Also, while i think that there’s a core group of people in the Republican Party, especially among Tea Party types, who know that this is racist imagery and are happy to use it anyway, the Republican Party in California at just about every level was very quick to distance itself from Davenport’s email. Not only that, but the criticism of her by GOP leaders was not some sort of wishy-washy criticism that actually attempted to excuse her racist sentiments. Folks like the head of the Orange County Republicans and the head of the California Republicans used terms like “despicable” and “dripping with racism” to describe the email; quite an unequivocal condemnation.
I disagree with Republicans about lots of things, and i think that some of their policies end up having a disproportionate effect on poor people who are part of racial and ethnic minorities, but i don’t think that most Republicans are racists or would use racist imagery to talk about Obama. I just wish that, when shit like this happens, the leaders of the party would always be as unequivocal in their condemnation of it as have the GOP leaders in California, because it doesn’t always happen like that.
Baggers have lots of racists in their group. That is where they live.
Republicans aren’t racist, but racists are Republicans. And the reason is that the Republican have used sleazy, race baiting tactics since Nixon’s Southern Strategy.
Racists wouldn’t be Republicans if they didn’t feel comfortable there.
Should have stuck with the old “Obama is the Joker” imagery.
Yabbut, if they do that, there’s no birth certificate joke to hang it on…
On the SDMB? No.
Of course, the Democrats would get a black person to call the names and attempt to shield themselves from blow back that way. So it wouldn’t be the same at all.
Regards,
Shodan
Our issues with the delightful Ms. Condi have nothing to do with the color of the skin on her hands, its the color of the blood they are drenched in.
Did this actually happen at any point during the eight years Rice was in office? Or is your cite that it happened that way in your imagination?
I’m not sure what you mean - Manda JO’s post was a hypothetical.
Have there been attacks on Condi Rice that could be seen as racist? Sure. That happened sometimes, including, as I mentioned, racist characterizations from a black that would have been condemned on the SDMB if it had come from a white.
But somehow that didn’t seem to generate the same outrage on the SDMB as this does. If you can imagine. 
Regards,
Shodan
Then listen and learn.
I’ve come to realize that as a caucasian, gentile, middle-class American not-in-a-wheelchair guy, I honestly have no idea what it’s like to be in a minority.
I’m not complaining. If I were a “conflicted liberal” I’d secretly wish I had an ethnicity (maybe even a Kenyan birth certificate), but I’m fine with my lot in life. But one of the downsides of being a majority is that I have ZERO sensitivity to what it’s like to be looked down upon by racists.
So, yeah, as a teacher I think of a lot of (hi-LAR-i-ous) one-liners that I really can’t use in a mixed race class.
But if I did, it really wouldn’t be much of a defense that “golly, folks, I don’t think I’m a racist…”.
Interesting question.
Despite Shodan’s blithe hand-waving (did you really expect anything else?), i suspect that many (most?) liberals and Democrats would have been just as critical of any attempts to portray Rice as a chimp. I certainly would have been.
Despite the fact that i think Republicans like Michael Steele and Alan Keyes are idiots, i would never support any attempt to portray them as chimps. And this would be my reaction for precisely the reasons that i’ve outlined in this thread: that portraying a black person as a chimp is NOT just about that particular individual, but about black people and race more generally.
Also, the fact that Shodan’s argument appears to rest on a whole world of what-ifs, and not on any actual Democrats equating any actual black Republicans with chimps, suggests another possibility: that Democrats don’t need to apologize for racism in their party because there’s not as much of it.
There was once instance that i recall where we discussed a possibly racist caricature of Condoleezza Rice. You can find the thread here and the cartoon here.
I was somewhat conflicted on this issue. On the one hand, Rice is portrayed as a bird, specifically a parrot, in an effort to highlight her willingness to say whatever President Bush wanted her to say. To that extent, it was simply political commentary. On the other hand, the caricature did emphasize aspects of her appearance, such as large lips, that have often been used to caricature black people more generally. On the other hand again, though, the caricature does appear to emphasize particular characteristics of Rice’s own appearance, much the same way that a caricature of Obama with big ears would be a take on his own personal appearance. I was somewhat conflicted over this cartoon, and did find it a little bit troubling.
My own contribution to the thread can be found in this post and this one.
Another important issue, and one that Shodan conveniently slides by without apparent concern, is that the caricature mentioned in this thread is from someone inside the Republican Party, and distributed specifically to other Republicans inside the Party. While this fact doesn’t change the level of offensiveness either way, it is different, in terms of talking about American political culture, than a caricature that originates from some random citizen.
Shodan, do you think that the term “house Negro” is an intrinsically racist one?
Otherwise I’m not seeing much content in your cites, aside from perhaps the lips on the Condi-parrot.
Okay. I don’t get why this is racist. I don’t get why this is the worst thing you can caricature a black person as, comparable to a Jew eating a baby. It’s like everybody here is saying that Obama’s image will somehow be more damaged by being satirized as a chimp than Bush’s image would have been. It’s disrespectful in either case, but we supposedly have free speech here and the freedom to make fun of our elected officials, including the top guy. And he IS the top guy and I’m sure he can take care of himself without the help of a bunch of idiots on a message board.
If I were going to caricature Obama as the worst thing I could think of, I would pick something specific to him, not some old, tired, used-up insult from the '40s. Probably make him look like Bush.