priceless ...

[Fatman608]

Exactly the type of response that makes me want to throw up. Let's face it, and enough with any possible excuses. It's a black man in black clothes and sweats and the fact that he has technological advances makes "some" *cough* people angry.

Nowhere does this photo say anything about this man's income, why he's taking a picture, why he's there, or anything. If it was a white man in a suit would you have assumed the same? Even though the possibility could have existed that this homeless white man could have been given a nice outfit for the day. Let me answer for you... NO! No way would anyone have assumed or added the captions about this man.

You lost me, what does " It's a black man in black clothes and sweats and the fact that he has technological advances " have to do with any thing. I wish the gentleman was white and in a suit because it would have been twice as funny then to me.

I believe the proper term is African American so please do not be racist.

Sorry, I think the first priceless picture is funny as can be.

Love the Fatman

 

[tyflier]

First off I believe these "priceless" lines (as in this type of spin from the credit card commercial) are intended as a hyperbole of a situation. The picture IMO was spun this way NOT to denigrate the very John Doe in the photo but rather to shine a big spotlight on situations like this that DO exist.

That's a good excuse. Is it hyperbole to call a man a convicted felon with time served in prison when he was arrested and released without being charged? Is it hyperbole to say a man cannot hold an office because he isn't a Natural Citizen when he was born in Hawaii?

No...that's not hyperbole...it's lying. There is a difference.

The snopes link speculates just as much as the OP picture. They only succeed in the semantic argument and that is a stretch. So he wasn't "receiving a meal" he was only standing in line where the meals were being served. It may not be a Blackberry it could be a 7-11 prepaid phone that looks just like a Blackberry Curve right down to where his thumb is to push the trackball and take the pic. It wasn't outright gov funded but my guess would be that as a charity they are granted tax exemption and the private funding was probably claimed as a donation which in turn would be tax exempt so yes by omission they are in a way gov funded.

This is ridiculous. The snopes link spedculates. The photograph states, as if fact, assumptions. The snopes link is not saying what IS going on the photo, it is merely pointing out the millions of possibilities OTHER than the photograph's assumptions.

In the end, the person that created this, specifically made up "facts" to support a preconcieved idea, and used that idea to stir up an emotional response in citizen's that are not interested in seeing anything more than the surface. That's the definition of propoganda...

...It wasn't outright gov funded but my guess would be that as a charity they are granted tax exemption and the private funding was probably claimed as a donation which in turn would be tax exempt so yes by omission they are in a way gov funded.

"Government funded" means they recieve funds to operate from the government. Being tax exempt and being government funded are two completely and wholly different things. Otherwise, every Christian church in this country is "government funded", and that, my friend, is unConstitutional.

Saying something is known to be government funded when it is NOT, in fact, government funded, is lying. It's not hyperbole, it's not simile, it's not metaphor...it's lying.

Really?!?! The race card?!?! I don't care if he is purple. It's not about the man it's about the situation!

Really? Then why is it so wrong for the guy in front to have a camera, but it's perfectly OK for the guy behind him taking a picture to have a camera? The way I see it, there are at least 2 different cameras being used to take photographs in the exact same place. Why are you only mad about the guy in front?:shrugs:

How many other people do you think showed up in this cafe at some point during the day with a camera, cell phone, or other photographic device? Why is it the photo of the black guy in black clothes makes you so angry when there was most likely at least 10 other cameras there that daytaking pictures?:shrugs:

Again IMHO the photo was intended as a hyperbole directed at the abuse of the social programs in this country. If any of you wish to deny the existence, strike that, the prominence of that abuse we must live on different planets. :shrugs: :headbang:

I don't deny the abuse of social programs in this country. But that isn't Michelle Obama's fault, and this photograph isn't addressing the REAL abuses of aocial programs. It is taking a perfectly innocuous situation and creating an assumed abuse, and using it as media propoganda.

You want to discuss the real reforms needed in social welfare, I'm all for it. I'm sure we would agree on easily as many issues as we would disagree on. But this photograph isn't remotely accurate. Let's call a spade a spade. This is propoganda. And for people like the fatman to be insulting towards those of us able to look past the shiny surface is...well...insulting.

 

[wstphal]

"Government funded" means they recieve funds to operate from the government. Being tax exempt and being government funded are two completely and wholly different things. Otherwise, every Christian church in this country is "government funded", and that, my friend, is unConstitutional.

I rather think that tax exempt DOES equal government funded. Either way, my tax dollars are benefiting the organization in question. Either directly, my tax dollars being paid out to the organization, or indirectly, me paying more taxes because that organization DOESN'T pay taxes so the rest of us pay more. Cities like Boston that have a lot of "not-for-profit" hospitals and universities really struggle with the impact that has on city property taxes. That means that people who live in Boston, renters & owners alike, pay more, either as property taxes or as the portion of rent the property owner pays as property taxes, so that Massachusetts General Hospital and Boston University (for example) don't pay any property taxes. That seems really unfair to people who live in Boston itself.

 

[Fatman608]

Hey tyflier,

Sorry if you think I insulted you. However, I still think the first priceless picture is very funny as in humorous.

To bad Michael823 had to make it racial. I just thought the picture with captions is very well done because the captions have no racial content.

Love the Fatman

 

[vetusvates]

Todd, your corrections in post #11 are even more priceless than I have words to express.

Your sheer artistry alone deserves rep. :laugh:

I could post many many photos related to my job as a substance abuse counselor or halfway house director,...and they would not be racial to me, or even have racial overtones. Alcoholism, drugs, and homelessness...are just facts of life in a big city. Racism is beside the point. Just don't have time to go there.

 

[Michael823]

You lost me, what does " It's a black man in black clothes and sweats and the fact that he has technological advances " have to do with any thing. I wish the gentleman was white and in a suit because it would have been twice as funny then to me.

I believe the proper term is African American so please do not be racist.

Sorry, I think the first priceless picture is funny as can be.

Love the Fatman

Look, you can choose to ignore or what it is, but that doesn't change what it is. If it was a white man in a suit you would not have assumed as much, so yes, there is a racial element. People can go around trying to use political correctness as a witty and sly way to ignore what the truth is, but face it, it's about race.

I also have no pity for anyone who would look at a possibly homeless man with a cell phone as some greedy undeserving leach. Would you trade places with him? I guarantee that you would not!

I get so sick of the BS that goes on with issues like this. It's as clear as day to me, and I would literally put my life on it that there's a huge underlying racial element that's making such a silly photo so political, but I'm not going to argue about it. It is what it is. I know what it is, if you were honest with yourself you would know what it is, so... it is what it is, and unfortunately it will most likely always be that way. You don't need a hood and burning cross to have it be about race. It's basic stereotypes and assumptions like this right here that keeps racism plenty alive, so please, spare me the empty talk about "I believe the proper term is African American so please do not be racist.".

Also, there's no such thing as a "race card". It's a great way to further white supremacy to label such a thing a "race card" to trivialize all injustices of minorities in this country, but I'm not about to fall into that.

I'm sure that you could find thousands of photos of Obama rallies where clean cut white men were standing there taking photos on there cell, but that wouldn't fit the mold quite as well, and I doubt that it would ever make such a captivating political propaganda ad.

IT IS WHAT IT IS!!!

 

[Michael823]

Todd, your corrections in post #11 are even more priceless than I have words to express.

Your sheer artistry alone deserves rep. :laugh:

I could post many many photos related to my job as a substance abuse counselor or halfway house director,...and they would not be racial to me, or even have racial overtones. Alcoholism, drugs, and homelessness...are just facts of life in a big city. Racism is beside the point. Just don't have time to go there.

I'm sure that there are plenty of examples that you have, and I trust YOUR better judgment. I also know that you wouldn't make examples of someone who fits stereotypes and exploit them to fit a political agenda, so to me, that's why it's about race in this situation. After all, you stand in the front lines helping people who may be less fortunate, rather than some who just cast unfair judgments at them.

 

[Fatman608]

Look, you can choose to ignore or what it is, but that doesn't change what it is. If it was a white man in a suit you would not have assumed as much, so yes, there is a racial element. People can go around trying to use political correctness as a witty and sly way to ignore what the truth is, but face it, it's about race.

I also have no pity for anyone who would look at a possibly homeless man with a cell phone as some greedy undeserving leach. Would you trade places with him? I guarantee that you would not!

I get so sick of the BS that goes on with issues like this. It's as clear as day to me, and I would literally put my life on it that there's a huge underlying racial element that's making such a silly photo so political, but I'm not going to argue about it. It is what it is. I know what it is, if you were honest with yourself you would know what it is, so... it is what it is, and unfortunately it will most likely always be that way. You don't need a hood and burning cross to have it be about race. It's basic stereotypes and assumptions like this right here that keeps racism plenty alive, so please, spare me the empty talk about "I believe the proper term is African American so please do not be racist.".

Also, there's no such thing as a "race card". It's a great way to further white supremacy to label such a thing a "race card" to trivialize all injustices of minorities in this country, but I'm not about to fall into that.

I'm sure that you could find thousands of photos of Obama rallies where clean cut white men were standing there taking photos on there cell, but that wouldn't fit the mold quite as well, and I doubt that it would ever make such a captivating political propaganda ad.

IT IS WHAT IT IS!!!

I do not believe I ever said anything about a "race card". I do believe you brought up race not me. So to me that makes you the racist and not me. I have no idea what "Obama rallies" are unless they are like car rallies. Please be careful at car rallies because the cars do some times go flying off the road and crash into the crowd.

Love the Fatman

 

[Daenerys]

Look, you can choose to ignore or what it is, but that doesn't change what it is. If it was a white man in a suit you would not have assumed as much, so yes, there is a racial element. People can go around trying to use political correctness as a witty and sly way to ignore what the truth is, but face it, it's about race.

I also have no pity for anyone who would look at a possibly homeless man with a cell phone as some greedy undeserving leach. Would you trade places with him? I guarantee that you would not!

I get so sick of the BS that goes on with issues like this. It's as clear as day to me, and I would literally put my life on it that there's a huge underlying racial element that's making such a silly photo so political, but I'm not going to argue about it. It is what it is. I know what it is, if you were honest with yourself you would know what it is, so... it is what it is, and unfortunately it will most likely always be that way. You don't need a hood and burning cross to have it be about race. It's basic stereotypes and assumptions like this right here that keeps racism plenty alive, so please, spare me the empty talk about "I believe the proper term is African American so please do not be racist.".

Also, there's no such thing as a "race card". It's a great way to further white supremacy to label such a thing a "race card" to trivialize all injustices of minorities in this country, but I'm not about to fall into that.

I'm sure that you could find thousands of photos of Obama rallies where clean cut white men were standing there taking photos on there cell, but that wouldn't fit the mold quite as well, and I doubt that it would ever make such a captivating political propaganda ad.

IT IS WHAT IT IS!!!

I'd just like to reiterate what I said earlier in this thread:

I do believe he was making political remarks, not racial ones. Obama's slogan thing was about HOPE and CHANGE, and Obama has brought us a new health care system. What he said had nothing to do with race, but politics.

The only one here making it racist is you.

 

[wstphal]

Personally, I think the picture would have worked just as well if the photo-taker had been a Caucasian whose clothing choices suggested low socioeconomic status & possible homelessness. That would have been perfect, and the captioning would have been just as funny.

Does that make me a racist?

 

[Leew]

Absolutely amazing. I saw this post when it was new and only had a couple of replies. I chuckled and went on my way. I come back a few days later to same old cast and crew had turned it into political propaganda and a racial slur. Unbelievable. Remember when people used to tell jokes and everyone would laugh?

My wife is blond, and I tell blond jokes. I read a hilarious joke about dog food this morning, I hope HSUS knows I love my doggie. I’m a fat bald guy, anyone have a joke for me?

 

[tyflier]

Absolutely amazing. I saw this post when it was new and only had a couple of replies. I chuckled and went on my way. I come back a few days later to same old cast and crew had turned it into political propaganda and a racial slur. Unbelievable. Remember when people used to tell jokes and everyone would laugh?

My wife is blond, and I tell blond jokes. I read a hilarious joke about dog food this morning, I hope HSUS knows I love my doggie. I’m a fat bald guy, anyone have a joke for me?

Yea...as if the original post was not political in nature.

It's really quite simple...a joke is a joke, propoganda is propoganda. Calling propoganda hyperbole is false. Calling propoganda a joke is false.

It's only "funny" because you find yourself in agreement with the purely political overtones of the image. It's only a "joke" because you tend to agree with it's particular choice in propoganda.

It's racial because of the chosen individual from which to make the propoganda. This person was not the only individual there that day taking pictures, yet this individual was chosen for this propoganda because he fits a stereotype. This individual wasn't the only person there with a camera, yet this individual fit a particular stereotype that played directly to the emotions of the viewers and created anger. Without it, propoganda wouldn't work.

You guys can sit there and say "it's a funny little joke" all you want, but in the end, it is purely political propoganda. And those of us able to see it for what it is don't find it amusing...

 

[Duff]

... same old cast and crew had turned it into political propaganda...

No, it was already propaganda. As you obviously don't know what that term means, here you go (skip #1):

pro·pa·gan·da noun \ˌprä-pə-ˈgan-də, ˌprō-\
Definition of PROPAGANDA

1 capitalized : a congregation of the Roman curia having jurisdiction over missionary territories and related institutions

2: the spreading of ideas, information, or rumor for the purpose of helping or injuring an institution, a cause, or a person

3: ideas, facts, or allegations spread deliberately to further one's cause or to damage an opposing cause; also : a public action having such an effect

 

[Daenerys]

Pretty much everything political is propoganda these days....its all turned into childish fingerpointing and lying to get ahead in the game

 

[Fatman608]

Hey Leew,

You got to remember some people do not have a since of humor and that is priceless.

Some people will appoint themselves the PC police.

That is America.

Love the Fatman

 

[Michael823]

Yea...as if the original post was not political in nature.

It's really quite simple...a joke is a joke, propoganda is propoganda. Calling propoganda hyperbole is false. Calling propoganda a joke is false.

It's only "funny" because you find yourself in agreement with the purely political overtones of the image. It's only a "joke" because you tend to agree with it's particular choice in propoganda.

It's racial because of the chosen individual from which to make the propoganda. This person was not the only individual there that day taking pictures, yet this individual was chosen for this propoganda because he fits a stereotype. This individual wasn't the only person there with a camera, yet this individual fit a particular stereotype that played directly to the emotions of the viewers and created anger. Without it, propoganda wouldn't work.

You guys can sit there and say "it's a funny little joke" all you want, but in the end, it is purely political propoganda. And those of us able to see it for what it is don't find it amusing...

Great post, my thought exactly!

People hear the term "racist" and discount it if it's not as bold as KKK rallies or the N word itself. That's not the case 99% of the time in today's word savvy culture where racism (and bigotry altogether) is fed in constant small doses to avoid being obvious. This a racial issue because the ONLY reason why this photo was chosen was because it fit stereotypes that furthered the agenda or propaganda that was being pushed. Which is essentially that if your poor, male and black, you shouldn't be caught dead with the luxuries of privileged America. And if you should have them, then it's solely because the hard working white man afforded you the opportunity to even own it. The same goes with most poor and jobless people, but the image of a black man in black sweats made it even more appealing for propaganda.

IT'S NOT A JOKE!

I also don't buy that anyone would find it more entertaining if it was a white man in a suit. I could maybe see that as a valid point if it was proven that the white man was homeless. But the fact is that nothing about this man is known, from the status of his job, his name, his cell phone or why he's even there. Yet if it was just some anonymous white man (JUST AS THIS MAN IS ANONYMOUS) no one would have seen the caption less picture and assumed
homeless, governmental leach. The photo would NOT have been presented as it was, I put my life on that.

 

[Leew]

It's the first lady and a guy is taking her picture. You want to make that into some kind of a racial joke or propaganda go for it. If you don't find it funny, don't laugh. If you want to spend your day looking for reasons to feel picked on, I guess that is your prerogative.

Even if it were political and racial (the first lady is black you know) it's ok to laugh at yourself from time to time. As I said, I can tell blond jokes and still like my wife.

 

[wstphal]

I also don't buy that anyone would find it more entertaining if it was a white man in a suit. I could maybe see that as a valid point if it was proven that the white man was homeless. But the fact is that nothing about this man is known, from the status of his job, his name, his cell phone or why he's even there. Yet if it was just some anonymous white man (JUST AS THIS MAN IS ANONYMOUS) no one would have seen the caption less picture and assumed homeless, governmental leach. The photo would NOT have been presented as it was, I put my life on that.

Most of the homeless people I have dealt with in my life were white. Many had drug problems. Many had mental health problems. Some were just lazy. The lazy ones looked & dressed differently than the folks who had major strikes against them. This picture would have tickled my funny bone a lot more if it had been a white guy who looked like one of the lazy ones, frankly. The contrast would have been middle class hardworking black Michelle Obama vs lazy white dirt ball with an expensive phone he probably stole. THAT would have been funny to me because I have had to deal with that type.

It wouldn't have been funny if it was a white guy or a black guy in a suit. Part of what was visually funny, never mind the propaganda meanings, was the visual contrast between the First Lady, who looks entirely polished & put together in a way that's appropriate for the setting but also says she is middle class or higher but not snooty about it, vs a guy who is not dressed middle class at all.

Truthfully, most of the homeless black folks I have met were of the drugs, alcohol or mental illness groups not the lazy group. I don't find people who are struggling with illnesses annoying or funny the way I find lazy ones. I'm not adept enough at assessing what this picture actually contains to know for sure the guy with the camera is a lazy bum. He could be down on his luck but got his smart phone before the bad luck. He could have a job and just dress the way he did to come to the event. Maybe he's middle class & earned his smart phone but dressed down so he could get into the event so he could take a picture. Expletive deleted if I know. There's a whole universe of subtle cultural details I'm not up on enough to read them.

 

[The_Thunderer]

I chuckled a bit... Here's what I saw...

The FL is serving meals at a soup-kitchen/shelter of some sort. The guy in front of her with the camera is apparently in line to receive the food from the FL (the guy behind him seems to be "next" in line). While waiting, he whips out his cell phone and uses its camera to take a picture of the First Lady.

The reason it is "funny" to me is because I'm saddled with a $200 phone bill a month (4 phones - Verizon family plan). Yet here is a picture of a supposedly homeless/down and out person who can still afford to have a cell phone in a line receiving a "free" meal from the First Lady.

I saw irony in the picture... race had nothing to do with it. As a matter of fact, Michelle Obama had nothing to do with it... it could have been Hillary Clinton or Laura Bush... no difference.

Funny thing is, in the end, I was MORE chuckling about MY situation and struggles than anyone else's - including the man in the picture taking a picture of the FL.

Geez, folks...

 

[Duff]

Hey Leew,

You got to remember some people do not have a since of humor and that is priceless.

Some people will appoint themselves the PC police.

That is America.

Love the Fatman

Since when do I not have a sense of humor? Ask anyone that really knows me, I have a very healthy sense of humor. But what I also have is a brain and the ability to distinguish jokes from blatant attempts to sway people's opinions under the guise of humor.