"By these things examine thyself. By whose rules am I acting; in whose name; in whose strength; in whose glory? What faith, humility, self-denial, and love of God and to man have there been in all my actions?" ~ Jackie Mason
Jackie Mason, the famous (or infamous, depending on one's particular ideology) comedian, is in trouble again. Apparently, he used a racial epithet when describing Barack Hussein Obama in his act on Saturday night.
What horrible racist insult did Mr. Mason utter that so inflames the media?
Disclaimer: The following word might be deemed offensive to race baiters, whites suffering from white guilt, and Liberals of every stripe.
The word that Mason used to describe Obama is, (drum roll, please) "SCHWARTZA".
Schwartza? What is Schwartza? According to the news reports, "Schwartza" is a Yiddish term, meaning...Wait for it...."Black".
Black? Wait a minute. Isn't black the very description of Obama that Liberals celebrate? Isn't that the singular trait that Obama's adoring followers believe makes him qualified to be President in the first place?
It couldn't be his policies. No one had any idea what his policies were on election day. He obviously wasn't elected because of his policies.
It couldn't be his verbosity. He demonstrated continually that he couldn't make a speech without relying heavily on a teleprompter.
It couldn't be his beliefs. He made it a point to make absolutely sure we didn't equate his beliefs with the beliefs of any of his mentors, such as Reverend Jeremiah Wright, or with his heroes, such as Cesar Chavez and Saul Alinsky, or with his friends, such as Bill Ayres and Tony Rezco. If he didn't share their beliefs, we have no clue as to what he really does believe.
Except that he's a Marxist.
After the election, the only positives the media could say about him was that he isn't Bush, and is the first black president. Indeed, as early as last Friday, I heard Chris Matthews say (with his own mouth, no less)that Obama is black.
Why isn't Chris Matthews being persecuted for being a racist? Didn't he, in essence, say the exact same thing? What's the difference?
How is it that Jackie Mason is now labeled a racist for merely stating an obvious fact about the duck in chief?
It's no secret that Jackie Mason is a Conservative. It's also no secret that Obama and his followers don't like Conservatives. So, could it be that those who pretend to be offended by Jackie Mason's words are simply over-reacting, and intentionally trying to create a scandal where no scandal exists?
The fact is, Jackie Mason is an equal opportunity offender.
I once saw a comedy special featuring Jackie Mason when he made several ethnic jokes and didn't manage to offend anyone. I remember specifically him saying, "I have great respect for the black man in this country, Could you buy a Cadillac with no job?"
The blacks in his audience didn't complain or walk out in disgust. They laughed.
I know the real objection to Jackie Mason's remark: He was referring to Barack Hussein Obama. We all know it is heresy to say anything even remotely critical of Obama. He can call a black man a black man. He can call a Jew a Jew. He can call an Italian an Italian.
But if he calls Obama a black man, he is a racist. But that isn't the only reason he's a racist. Oh, no. He is a racist because he's a Conservative that calls Obama a black man.
And that, my friends, is unforgivable.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
People just aren't allowed to TALK anymore.
I don't have any problem whatsoever with Jackie Mason referring to Obama as Schwartza.
However, the rest of your post is pure nonsense.
Doesn't hold a candle to Farrakhan calling Judaism a "gutter" religion or Jesse Jackson calling New York "Hymie Town." Mason's real offense is not that he's conservative, but that he's Jewish. Lefties hate Jews.
Most Jews are ultra-liberal, Ranger.
And as for this Yiddish term meaning black, yes it's neutral when denoting color, but when applied to those of African descent it can have a very negative connotation, at least in the last century.Jackie Mason knows that, despite his protestations to the contrary.
When used by non-Jewish whites, it is a more polite way of coding the word "nigger."
It's nearest English equivalent is "Nigrah", a common southern pronunciation in the 1960's--southern whites' way of saying "nigger" in a demeaning way, but making it sound like "negro" with a southern accent--listen to tapes of George Wallace.
I heard it used a lot when growing up, actually. And not in a kindly way.
There is no other reason for Mason to use the term, except as a quasi-acceptable racial slur that most people are not familiar with.
You can use words like wop, dago, kike, kraut etc. in a comedy routine, and get away with it, but you can't use the word "nigger"--that offends negros unless they are using it themselves. So what to use? It's a dilemma for Jackie. Swartze is as good as any and is not as common as it once was.
Clint Eastwood delights in using every racial epithet his memory can muster in his latest and probably last to act in movie,(Gran Torino, 2008), which was largely ignored at the Oscars (despite the fact it is his most financially rewarding to date), but which oddly enuff has racial harmony (and disharmony) as one of its themes.
Two words: Chris Rock.
Jim,
Rick said, "except when they use it themselves." That would include Chris Rock.
Mark,
I would have commented on this sooner but got distracted watching other Mason vids on YouTube. The guy kills me.
You are a race baiting liar. You are the true racist and an anti Semite
Getting upset over Mason using a Yiddish word that simply means "black" is just ignorant and race baiting.
It's as ignorant and race bating as when, in 2012, Senator Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) used the word "niggardly" in response to a question about spending for veterans. "Niggardly" is an archaic word which simply means chear or miserly . I wish these perpetually offended people would invest in a dictionary before they go running their ignorant mouths.
Post a Comment