True enough. People have the absolute right to be total pricks to other people. That's part of free speech. But the question I ask is do they NEED to be? Is it kind? Is it necessary? Does it help anything? What is it about the right to be a prick that some people find so absolutely g-dd-mn important?

Political correctness does NOT shut down discussion. You're mistaking it for censorship. What political correctness does is if someone is being a racist butthole, it means I can CALL them a racist butthole without feeling bad about it. Free speech does not mean you can say whatever you want without rebuttal. If you don't want to hear unkind opinions about your rhetoric maybe you should think very carefully about what you say in public. They didn't call it political correctness when I was growing up. They called it "being polite". It seems to have gone out of fashion but I still dig it. Did I miss a boycott somewhere? As far as I know, some people complained about the figures and the company pulled them. That's not a boycott. A boycott is when a group of people get together and say they are going to stop buying products from a company until their demands are met. As far as I know, neither Sharpton nor the people objecting to the toys are toy collectors so they aren't boycotting anything.
THAT ladies and gentlemen, is a perfect example of a strawman argument. I now feel bad about taking the time to respond to the rest of this post. I really shouldn't have bothered to engage.

Gotta call BS on that one, Fone.

Political Correctness is the reason why our government is bending over backward not to say "Islamic" whenever there is a terrorist attack, even though the (so-called) religion of "peace" is behind the vast majority of terror in this century. Political Correctness is why we all have to take off our shoes and get scanned at the airport, when it would be much more efficient to target those that cause the terror like Israel does.

Profiling makes sense when simple facts back it up.

Whoops. There I go being un-PC again. Somebody call a lawyer!



Back to the toys, if you don't like 'em, don't buy 'em. Simple, yes?

I love when people feel like it's their job to be offended on behalf of a bunch of other people. Here's the bottom line, and you know, you wanna call me a prick, then let's assume i now have carte blanche to be one: it's people who scream racism and point fingers at people for "being racist" that is one of the last things propegating racism in this country. Black people acheived autonomy on their own. They don't need michelle pfeiffer to teach them about bob dylan in public school. the only thing that serves to do is make white people feel better about themselves. hey, thanks for helping that football player, sandra bullock. now i can sleep better. i find it to be just as assinine that white people argue over how to treat black people the way parents argue in front of children as i do spike lee getting angry that tarantino has white people using the word roodypoo in django unchained. either everybody gets to use it or nobody gets to use it. i would prefer nobody gets to use it, but hey, it's america, right? i seem to remember a time in america when a certain group of people weren't allowed to do certain things by another group of people who that thing was reserved for. thought we decided THAT was a racist way to behave. Anyhow, this is about toys, not racism. Nobody was trying to make this a conversation about racism. It was about a couple people being butt-hurt about slave toys, and, good point brought up earlier, if they're not pulling them all, then they must not be TOO f-ing offensive, but guess what? People wanna be offended? Let em be offended. People like Al Sharpton are going to find something to be offended about, especially in public. Good thing he's got a few white people helping validate his outlandish claims and rubbing his back and telling him how he has every right to act like a dildo. A dildo's a dildo, no matter what color he is.

And you wonder why some people are offended.

haha, are you paraphrasing me there?

I believe we don't call it Islamic terrorism because if we did that we'd have to call the bombings of abortion clinics and shooting up of liberal churches Christian terrorism. I don't blame the government not wanting to open up that can of worms with the right wing. Terrorism is terrorism regardless of the religion.
You DO realize this all started under the Bush Administration, correct? We liberals warned you guys all about this but we were told that if we didn't do anything wrong we have nothing to fear. Is that frog boiled yet?
Completely agree. Like I said, I think Reverend Al is wrong on this one and his argument doesn't make much sense. But I'm not going to tell him how to feel about the subject.

You will get no disagreement from me about the utter wrongness of the Patriot Act. I was kinda hoping your guy would at least do something about it, but he couldn't even do that right!

And you are correct about the abortion shootings, that was terrorism. But even the crazy Pro-Lifers don't hijack airplanes and fly them into buildings.

It's c r a p like that which made me give up on organized religion (ANY organized religion) years ago.

In the words of Rodney King: "Can't we all just get along?"

Sadly, it appears we can't.

BTW I believe Django is now QT's most successful movie, so I'm sure we'll have many more controversies about his work in the future.

Yay.

Unfortunately, that was never going to happen, Shellhead. It sucks but the worst thing about executive power grabs is they are permanent. No president is going to give up ANY ounce of power they have for any reason. I always asked reasonable conservatives back in the day if they would like the powers Bush claimed for the executive branch to belong to a future Democratic president. Well, we have our answer.

I have the Stephanie Swift figure. It's pretty cool.

This is absolutely absurd. The number of potentially offensive toys on the market is astronomical. Tortured Souls, horror film figures, pornographic figures, and what have you.

This statement of being offended is complete nonsense. Not that people may not be offended by Django Unchaned, but the fact that it has gone to this level. I have to agree with Shishalzafrazz, just about 100%. We live in a country, where it has become increasingly popular for any group of people to stand around with their hand out, waiting for money/opportunity/apology/special treatment, etc., because they've somehow been wronged. An "ambulance chaser" mentality, if you will (thank you, attorneys). Slavery is a terrible thing. No human being should undergo that type of monstrous demoralization. That being said, last time I checked, I don't recall many folks from our slavery era being alive today. I think Ben Folds said it best in his song "Rockin' the Suburbs":

In a haze these days
I pull up to the stoplight
I can feel that something's not right
I can feel that someone's blasting me
With hate and bass
Sending dirty vibes my way
Cause my great great great great grandad
Made someone's great great great great grandaddy slaves
It wasn't my idea
It wasn't my idea
It never was my idea
I just drove to the store
For some preparation h

In today's society, it's seen as desirable to be pissed off about something, put your foot down and say, "NO!" People throw fits, and we pander them. Political posturing, grand-standing, and social statements have become more important than what a person stands for or believes is right and just. It's not about being offended. It's about thinking, "I can throw a fit, and you have to do something to make me happier." It's cat and mouse. It's Pavlov's dog. It's "If You Give a Mouse a Cookie." It's become an addiction for far too many Americans; this "you owe me something" attitude. It is absolutely abhoring.

Sadly, most people these days don't stand for what they believe in, they stand for what they believe makes them look better than the person standing next to them. If you pay attention, what you'll find is that these people will try to fight what they perceive as "hate" with even more hate. We had a vote here a few months back on an LGBT ordinance. You should have seen the smoke and fire it started. In all the appeals and hearings, and whatnot that went on over those few months, just about everyone had an opinion. I work at a local non-profit, and a gentleman here read over the ordinance a number of times. We came to the conclusion, that the majority of people on both sides didn't even have a good understanding of what the ordinance entailed. But, they were passionate about the subject matter, so they felt justified in whatever means it took to get their opinions across. Relevant or not. I won't go into the details of the ordinance and what went on, but I was really surprised to find that it was LGBT supporters that were much more prone to being belligerent and hateful. Those with the perception of being oppressed or offended, in short, have no qualms about lashing back with more oppression, offense, and hate. So, what do these examples of posturing tell us? Unfortunately, thus, we see the a common truth in human nature. How many riots have started with each side having a solid understanding of the other? Check out an awesome social-psychological theory called "terror management" which thoroughly explains these behaviors in-depth: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terror_management_theory

We must never abandon the desire for social justice. When people are passionate about a cause, we can achieve great things. But, if that passion and drive completely takes over, we lose sight of the cause and become fools who stamp our feet, climb upon our high horses, and make demands of our "oppressors," like so many spoiled children. The cause doesn't matter anymore because we've forgotten what we were fighting for. What begins to matter is the idea that we're passionate and committed to standing our ground (even if e no longer know why), because we all like to tell ourselves "I am a good and decent person who cares about important things," but the subtext of what that really means is, "I am better than you other people who don't care," which translates to, "I am better than other people."

Bottom line: They're toys. It has nothing to do with racism or politics. It's all about posturing and social statements, and pandering to the bandwaggoners that follow. The one thing I can say that this whole debacle has going for it, is that the company freely decided to pull the toys themselves, not made to by any governing body.

From that link you posted:

"Taking into account that many of the Lego figures carry weapons, the Turkish organisation also urged parents “not to buy toys of war or toys of discrimination” as the model goes against the “peaceful coexistence of different cultures in Europe”. "


Pretty ironic since I"m sure this group has NOT called out Palestinian schools and textbooks that are turning Palestinian kids of all ages into Israel-hating terrorists.


Back to Django: good ole Rev Al needed something to be angry about, so this came along at the perfect time. Being outraged is big business these days.


edit: just read Hal's post: very nice! +1

Thank you!