I note with approval that the OP links to a “mirror” on You Tube with the comments still enabled. Pip, pip! Good show, that!
So if you had a gong and an Asian woman talking about how Stabenow’s policies helped “our” economy at the expense of the U.S., nobody would get that she’s Chinese… unless super commercial lady talk like this? I don’t think I believe that.
And I’m not saying it’s racist just because it’s laughably bad. I’m saying the racial elements make it laughable. For the record, here’s a cite that the ad was filmed in America and the actress is American.
From the cited source.
So, hypothetically speaking, if the script for the ad were leaked and the young woman’s name (though not mentioned in the version of the ad playing on TV and YouTube) happened to be Ching-Chong Ding-Dong, would you stand by your assertion that the ad is merely bad, but not racist?
Refresh my memory. Was Hoekstra the Republican guy who wouldn’t let the Bushiviks get away with putting the whole Iraq War on our Chinese Express card? No, wait, that was Chimera J. Unicorn (R, Narnia)
Hmm. Actually I’m not sure that fact would make the ad more or less racist, although it certainly makes it look bad for the ad writers, and possibly for the candidate that it supported.
So, Marley, you and the other usual dumbasses are just going to sit around and stroke it over another batch of racist outrage porn. If you or anyone else wants to make an argument that the ad is racist, please PM me. Hell, I might make that argument myself just to show you idiots how it’s done.
Silence foul hamster!
Yep, that’s rather the point, isn’t it? Marley and the Usual Idiots don’t have the brains to make an argument for their position, so they just shout down anyone who disagrees with them. Mic check! Mic check!
Go for it. I tremble at your intellectual superiority that you can argue any side of anything better than a bunch of liberals.
Meanwhile, I’ll fill out a Mad Libs with a bunch of libertarian/objectivist lingo and we shall see which essay is more thoughtful.
Rand Rover, I wasn’t going to bother with you, but I guess you’ll pitch a fit if you don’t get an answer. People have been explaining throughout the thread why they think the ad is racist. You might find those reasons unsatisfactory, but who cares about that? Meanwhile, you’ve ignored the entire thread and then criticized people for not posting explanations that have already been posted (which went unread by you). So why would anyone bother engaging with you when you’ve already proven you’re going to ignore anything you don’t agree with? It’s like you’re demanding people write you off as an arrogant blowhard.
nope, I’m demanding people make an actual argument for a position. And you think that’s some amazingly difficult thing to do. Trying to argue against assertion is like boxing steam–there’s nothing to hit. So, the “hamsters” are well within their rights and proper protocol to simply say “nope” until someone on your side takes a stand and makes an argument.
Let’s see you write up a post making an actual argument that this ad is racist. Or don’t do it if you don’t have the mental horsepower.
No, really, you’re a mental hamster not worth engaging.
Be quiet already.
So your strategy is to win by declaring that nobody else is making an argument. I agree that you’ve made that declaration, so according to Rand Rover’s rules of order, you win. Your undefeated record remains intact. You can read the thread for comprehension or not, but I’m not going to copy and paste it.
Anyway this part of the Hoekstra page is especially awesome because it reproduces the broken English from the ad in text form. That makes sense. Chinese people write the way they talk, right? Plus it’s got a traditional Chinese dragon, and those are great. I also hadn’t noticed the actress’ hat before- I guess the character actually is supposed to work on a rice paddy or something similar. This thing has so many subtle touches.
Dude, it’s right there in post #26. You might not like it, but it’s an argument. Here it is again, since you apparently can’t read and prefer to just whine.
[QUOTE=Jas09]
The argument is that (a) racial stereotypes are used to (b) introduce and/or reinforce a negative association about a given race.
[/QUOTE]
You may notice that John Mace provided a critique of the argument and there was a bit of give-and-take. You know, like adults talking instead of you throwing your shit around.
a) Wow! That’s some pretty great html coding.
b) Wow! As many others have noticed, that woman is cute.
c) Wow! This is what passes as American politics? 
I don’t think the ad is racist, but it’s close enough to make me feel uncomfortable.
(As for the actress… meh. She is pretty but not enough so that it’s worth commenting on. I saw prettier girls pretty much every day in Asia.)
I don’t see how any reasonable person wouldn’t see the ad as racist.
For starters her accent didn’t sound remotely like someone from China with imperfect English but like someone doing a parody of a Chinese accent and I’ve never heard Chinese immigrants speaking broken English say “me likee”.
She actualy sounded more like a Vietnamese prostitute in one of those Vietnam War movies from the 80s.
In fact, the people crafting the ad were clearly dog-whistling with imagery far more associated with Vietnam than China.
Why else have a pretty peasant girl, who speaks like a stereotypical Vietnese hooker in rice paddies instead of a factory worker or some executive from Shanghai.
The website literally says in quotes “We take your jobs.” as if the girl from the video had said it.
Laughably offensive.
As others have said, it isn’t the political point being made that’s offensive, it is the imagry used to make the point.
And more importantly - the actress is, indeed, quite attractive. 