Please disseminate widely, thank you! This does not give permission to alter or claim credit for this re-mixed work, for which I retain all copyrights. I claim a fair use exemption vis-a-vis the re-mixed illustration. The original is in the public domain.
If you disagree with the views expressed here, please be sure to read my Policy Statement BEFORE you post: [link]
I will always remember President Obama as having the worst record on civil liberties of any President in American history. He has made a felony of protesting in front of the White House, used Federal resources to "coordinate" the simultaneous destruction of 28 peaceful Occupy encampments, and asserted his "right" to assassinate American citizens merely on his suspicion that they have provided "material support" to terrorists, all without charge or trial. It takes the breath away.
I've just updated the copy on this poaster, in commemoration of today's SCOTUS decision on the so-called FISA Amendments. The Court ruled that the plaintiffs -- journalists, lawyers, and civil libertarians -- had no standing to sue the government over NSA's warrantless interception of their international telephone calls and emails because they could not show that their phone calls and emails had, in fact, been intercepted. But wait! The list of whose international telephone calls and emails have been intercepted without warrant is protected national security information which cannot be divulged, and so, there is no way to prove in court that one has standing to sue. Catch-22 is alive and well, folks, and it is shredding Constitutional protection against unlawful searches and seizures inch by inch. Lincoln's suspension of habeas corpus and Roosevelt's internment of the Japanese during World War II were ignominious episodes in American history, but in terms of their long-term effects, they pale in comparison to the assault being waged against our civil liberties by the national security state. The Professor ought to be ashamed.
The way you've presented your message (particularly Obama's "dialect") comes across as possibly (unintentionally?) racist. This most likely harms the message of the piece and hurts any chance of people with opposing viewpoints or uninformed people taking your poster seriously.
As are many liberals, who would naturally be the primary target of this particular piece of propaganda. I was honestly just trying to help the piece be more effective in its intended purpose; personally, I don't have much problem with the original, but I think the new piece is more effective.
I think you're being overly sensitive, but I made the changes anyway. I don't care what color Obama is: he's an embarrassment to the progressive tradition in this country, and his record on civil liberties will stand as the worst in American history -- Bush included.
I never saw the original. I tend not to be overly racially sensitive.
But...this message is very hard for Obama supporters to swallow. IMO it's best to take pains to prevent anyone of them from being able to dismiss it out of hand by going "eh, who cares, just some racist's ramblings." Whether they actually BELIEVE that or not, they could use it to justify ignoring the message.
"Please shut up."
Well then by all means carry on.
But...this message is very hard for Obama supporters to swallow. IMO it's best to take pains to prevent anyone of them from being able to dismiss it out of hand by going "eh, who cares, just some racist's ramblings." Whether they actually BELIEVE that or not, they could use it to justify ignoring the message.