Extreme Justin

By Extreme Justin at http://extremejustin.com/

If you have not seen the ad, you can probably find it on youtube. There are several arguments about whether or not this ad is racist. It most definately is. It depicts Harold Ford as a womanizer hanging out at Playboy parties to hook up with white women. Next thing we will probably see from the Republican National Committee is some clips from Birth Of A Nation showing black congressmen eating fried chicken and watermelon during a congressional session. That is what is most disturbing is that the Republican National Committee, came up with this ad. Was this ad intended to be racist? I really don’t know. They are the representatives of one of the 2 major US parties. They should know better. They could have done their ad without the racism.

The second issue that I want to attack here is the portrayal of the Playmate stereotype. The ad never actually comes out and says that the girl is a Playmate, only that she “met Harold Ford at a Playboy party at the mansion.” She is blonde and does not seem very intelligent. I am personally offended by this because most of the Playmates I have met seem to be very intelligent and not all are blonde. This kind of bigotry is just hateful, set forth by men and women who hate anything like Playboy. I can name two Playmates offhand that were USF students: Alesha Oreskovich and my friend Carlotta Champagne. Neither are the embodiment of the blonde, stupid playmate that the ad tries to establish. I’m sick of Playmates being stereotyped.

The Republican National Committee agreed to pull the ad finally, but it could be that was always their intention, much like a lawyer bringing up an objectionable point and then shouting “withdrawn.” It is quite possible that this ad will backfire on them. That remains to be seen. There are negative ads put out by both parties. It is not the only negative ad out there, just one of the worst ones.

Extreme Justin

By Extreme Justin at http://extremejustin.com/

I have attempted not to be political and I will keep to that for now because the following is NOT political. If free thought is political than it is our DUTY and RESPONSIBLITY to remove the force that opposes it. This is not politics but something essential to the security and future of our great nation and to the world.

The President of the United States recently started a sentence (or at least a part of a sentence) with the words “it is unacceptable to think…” It is not only acceptable to think, it is neccessary. Believe me I have not taken these words out of context. When the supposed leader of the free world utters these words it is a move from democracy to tyrrany. I always supposed that Thought Crime was a fictional part of the book 1984 and that I would never see such a thing applied to the United States.

It is acceptable to think. We have to live with this President for two more years but we do not have to live with his Congress. The system of checks and balances is suppossed to ensure that the executive branch does not wield ultimate power and become a source of tyrrany. We cannot choose who is in the Supreme Court, but we can ensure who is in Congress.

I cannot believe that I am having to defend free thought. Due to recent events like Haliburton deciding who gets government medals, I thought it was time to speak up. We must save our country. This administration has already released official statements that anyone that speaks out against the war is akin to a Nazi sympathizer. Now they want our thoughts as well.

Justin