As Donald Trump’s campaign reaches out to African-Americans, Latinos and other minorities he has alienated with his nativist rhetoric, black voters are faced with a choice between two candidates, neither of whom seems to genuinely care about them or their problems.
The Choice
Ted Rall
Ted Rall is a syndicated political cartoonist for Andrews McMeel Syndication and WhoWhatWhy.org and Counterpoint. He is a contributor to Centerclip and co-host of "The Final Countdown" talk show on Radio Sputnik. He is a graphic novelist and author of many books of art and prose, and an occasional war correspondent. He is, recently, the author of the graphic novel "2024: Revisited."
14 Comments. Leave new
The Billary team deceptively indicates, “Believe in what we claim, not what we’ve always done ~” Before Trump can catch up with Billary, he’s going to have to fuck over at least a few more million alleged “thugs” of color.
Team T-rump plainly states, “If you’re of color and commit crimes, I’m going to take you out just like I’d take out any crooks of the cracker class.”
By the way, invading the U.S. without written permission IS a crime. From the very first moment of “wetbacking*” it, the invading slug is a crook.
*wetbacking is south-western colloquial for illegally crossing a border. It encompasses a tasteless truth.
DanD
Well, on the upswing, if it “looks good for/is good business” he’ll probably be convinced to do it. (like getting all the lead out of inner city area pipes) While he’s used Flint as a political football same as Clinton, he’ll at least make a half-arsed attempt as he did so when gentrifying New York.
I think Quanell X rolling with them will mitigate that to some extent over the next few months, where they begin to see some of the outrage out there as “justified retribution.”
(especially if the local origin of the problems is a democrat)
“Oh, hail ‘nigger’ ain’t no bad word, thass jess how we’all says ‘coon’ down heah”
You were interested in word origins the other day, do you know the origin of ‘wetback’? It’s someone who got wet by swimming across the Rio Grande. How many Syrian refuges do you suppose do that?
Even if some people have generalized it to include all illegal immigrants, it’s still a pejorative – like calling Arabs ‘sand niggers.’ It’s only used by haters.
BTW, I did take a stab at your little challenge. I get email notifications for many posts, of your last twenty posts, nine were anti-Semitic, (oh, excuse me, I meant “Jew Hating”) four were some other sort of racist, and only seven were neither. So, I apologize for saying all your posts express prejudice. – it’s only two out of three.
CH ~
You’re conflating the noun “Nigger” with the word “wetback.” The first is a pejorative against a race, the second insultingly describes the criminal conduct of a border-infiltrating, criminal invader. I don’t casually use the word Nigger because some members of my family may get upset at me. I do use the word wetback at ANY border-crashing crook, their race notwithstanding or otherwise exclusive of the definition I employ.
And since you’re only quoting yourself as the expert researcher, in that you seem to think that ANY criticism of Judaically-implemented crime is “anti-Semitic,” I think that you’re also just illustrating yourself as a shit-eating liar.
The slip of you’re own bigotry is showing quite badly.
DanD
Final reply, lest I be accused of bickering.
1) Fighting bigotry is the exact opposite of practicing bigotry.
2) The etymology & current meaning of “wetback” is well documented.
3) At no point did I conflate ‘wetback’ and ‘nigger.’ I used the latter as an example of the same sort of bleed over as with ‘wetback.’ You are, in effect, saying “these other people are just as bad as Mexicans.” For that to work, then obviously ‘Mexican’ must be a bad thing.
4) I have never once called you out on ‘banker’ or ‘bankster’ – only on ‘Zionist’ and ‘Zionist banker.’
5) The fact that you seem completely oblivious to just how racist your posts are merely serves to confirm my point. Like a fish in water, you’re in so deep you can’t even see it.
6) OTHER people can see it just fine.
You really are a sick-puppy liar, aren’t you CH?
Again, ZIONISTS are not necessarily Jews. There are in fact a multitude of Orthodox Jews who confirm this fact.
Thanks for proving my point about you boy.
DanD
Damn straight, Dan. Just had to turn off the TV because I can’t stand seeing representatives of the apparently monolithic block of Latino voters who would rather side with lawbreakers of their own tribe than with citizens of their nation.
Crossing a border and living in America without permission doesn’t make you an immigrant, citizen, or American. It makes you a squatter.
Like TR said, American immigrants should identify and side with America–not their countries of origin.
«By the way, invading the U.S. without written permission IS a crime. From the very first moment of “wetbacking*” it, the invading slug is a crook.» An adequate description, perhaps, of those who invaded the territory they pleased to call «Jamestown» in 1607, or those who invaded what they pleased to call «Plymouth» little more than a decade latter. The question is, of course, from whom that «written permission» to perform a certain act is to be obtained – in the case of Jamestown and Plymouth, from the then residents of North America or from the British monarchy, in the case, say, of the US invasion of Iraq in 2003, from the political representatives of that country or from the US Congress (Public Law No: 107-243)….
It should be noted that «crime» is a legal term and says little about an action’s moral status – after all, the US Fugitive Slave Acts of 1793 and 1850, respectively, made it a crime not to help slave «owners» recover their so-called «property». To my mind, Dan D, the moral obloquy in these cases rested not with the slaves and those who helped them escape, but with the so-called «owners» and those who helped them. But perhaps you, who seems to find it appropriate to term your fellow human beings «slug[s]», would disagree, with, of course, the warm approval of that odd figure who chooses to employ the sobriquet «Jack Heart»….
Henri
Here is yet another poignant cartoon commentary being sabotaged by petty bickering instead of intelligent discussion of Ted’s point. That is so sad. 🙁
Is not! Is not! So there, nyah!
Choice isn’t that tough. It’s between someone who has been terrible for blacks and someone who hasn’t.
Honesty is the best policy. Once you can fake that you’ve got it made.
Crooked Hillary is winning that game.
Trump needs to learn how to lie better.
The people want a fraud they can believe in. That’s why they like magic shows.
Another white cartoonist bravely speaking on behalf of black people who largely disagree with him.
You’re doing the lord’s work sir, they know not what they’re doing.
Vote Jill Stein: Because it somehow seems less self-absorbed than just writing in your own name.