For 8 years Bush was portrayed as a chimp. It is a common enough thing to call a president as every party wants to call their opponent a chimp. Now that Obama is president everyone sort of assumed that the term would no longer be used as calling a blackman a chimp is definately a no-no.

It is beyond any stretch of credibility that the person in the NY Post did not know that it was time for a non-racial insult was called for. Clearly this was to deliberately paint Obama as a chimp in the racist image.

So perhaps Obama is a chimp as is meant by the term chump.

Let me explain. It was a great surprise to many that he beat Hillary. Maybe Hillary allowed him to win in recognition of the economic collapse. The dirty work she wanted done is being done and the chimp gets the blame. Had she demanded that Obama released even his educational records which he refuses to disclose he was screwed. Had she played hardball with his shady background she would have won.

Now today there is another example of Obama being made to look like an imbecile. After all that has happened he comes out today in his address saying he intends to halve the deficit. Discounting the possibility that the speechwriter is retarded then this is deliberate. At the end of a week where he added 1275 billion to the deficit he talks about being a deficit hawk. He now looks like a chump who has not got a clue and his meetings with lower socio level people like he did in Florida reinforces the perception that this guy is even thicker than the last chimp.

Mark my words poor Obama the chimp is the biggest fall guy in history

Heard him on the radio think he said his tax measures would start to help people by April the FIRST!!

oops

Squire wrote:

Heard him on the radio think he said his tax measures would start to help people by April the FIRST!!

oops

Most countries do not have fiscal years that run January-December.

The reason for that is largely historical. Most countries ran on the old Julian calendar (every year started on Lady Day - 25th March). When they moved to the Gregorian calendar they 'lost' 11 days. So countries ended up with a range of different fiscal year start days.

The UK uses 6th April, which was where the 25th March jumped to that year when they moved calendars.

The US divides its fiscal year into four quarters. Until 1976 the fiscal year ran from 1st July to 30th June, which gave new presidents in office since their inauguration in March time to propose budget changes before the new fiscal year. Since the 1930s via a constitutional amendment the inauguration is now in January. So tax changes could be introduced far earlier. In 1976 new dates were chosen for the fiscal year: 1st October to 30th September.

Any changes made mid-year come into play at the start of the nearest quarter. As Obama is in office since January his tax changes at the start of the next quarter, which is 1st April.

Ireland is one of a few countries to use the Gregorian calendar (January-December) as the basis for its fiscal year. Traditionally Irish Chancellors of the Exchequer pre 1816, and British Chancellors of the Exchequer who assumed responsibility for Ireland post then, also used the British fiscal year, adjusted for the move from the Julian to Gregorian year, as the start of the fiscal year. Ministers for Finance kept up that process. So we started our fiscal year in April, having had a budget in January and Financial Bill in February. (The month long recess of the Dáil in January, which we still have, is a hangover from having a budget at the end of January. The Dáil would not meet in January as ministers were up to their necks in budget preparations. The long recess would give them time to focus entirely for the budget rather than having to spend their days in the Dáil dealing with other matters.)

In 2001 Charlie McCreevy changed the Irish fiscal year to January-December, hence moving the budget to November.

So Obama's selection of 1st April is perfectly logical. It is when new changes proposed by a new president come in, at the start of the third fiscal quarter. If the changes are not enacted by then, they have to wait until the fourth fiscal quarter on 1st July.

I think its tempting to think that someone allowed Obama to win to avoid the shitstorm that the new presidant has to face but I don't really believe it. For a start, Hillary is getting on and the trend is for younger presidents. Also, the crisis really started to hit in September didn't it - after Obama accepted. (I have to admit that I'm not sure about this, my knowledge of the timeline for the crisi is shakey).

Mostly though I think it comes down to vainity. Presidential candidates have to have a fairly high degree of self belief and I've no doubt that Hillary believes she is capable of bringing the US out of the recession. And imagine, the first female president, leading the US back from the brink of the economic abyss. She'd be considered one of the finest presidents ever if she pulled it off (as will Obama if his policies do the trick). Thats a massive appeal to any politicians ego.

About the cartoons, I reckon your about right, it sounds like a paper trying to be controversial to drive up sales. The way to get noticed is to say outrageous things certainly works on internet fora. Very bad taste, even if Obama is a chump.

Don't know why they thought they could get away with this one!

Liamnag01 wrote:

Don't know why they thought they could get away with this one!

Sorry, I'm not sure if this made the news over there, horrific injuries and a very cheap shot by the NY Post

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/2009/02/21/2009-02-21_mom_of_crazed_chimpanzee_travis_also_sho-1.html

It had to be to stir the pot of hatred. I do not like Obama clearly so I will just call him a donkey. It being the symbol of the democratic party a cartoonist has plenty of room to draw him like a donkey like bush was drawn like a chimp.

But to the issue of Obama being a fall-guy. We shall see. He has 2 years where they have total control. If the rush continues to get the nasty stuff passes without regards for Obama's popularity then we will know that the plan is to milk the chump for all he is worth and then toss him aside.

The huge stimulas package and the abortion package is done. The nasty stuff coming is The Fairness Doctrine, Warming taxes, Immigration, Real ID and A socialised health system. Anyone of these is enough to test his popularity but if they are pushed in quick succession then you can bet that a scandal or impeachment will get him from office. Then we will have a whole new ballgame

Papal_knight Two wrote:

Squire wrote:

Heard him on the radio think he said his tax measures would start to help people by April the FIRST!!

oops

Most countries do not have fiscal years that run January-December.

I am painfully aware of this. When I heard Obama say that most people would be better off by April Fools Day I thought Freudian mistake. I appealed to my twisted sense of humour.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQ7_ZzW1jJ4

This is more of it. One thing after another. 33 days in and he is a joke.

Is he deliberately made a joke or is he really a joke. Nobody can say because nobody has ever seen anything like it before.

It is that attitude problem of his surfacing again. You have a President with lots of attitude, how dare anyone criticise. They couldn't possibly have read the pearls of wisdom. Utterly stupid this will turn very sour, very quickly, if this is the administrations attitude.

youngdan wrote:

..a cartoonist has plenty of room to draw him like a donkey like bush was drawn like a chimp.
The nasty stuff coming is The Fairness Doctrine, Warming taxes, Immigration, Real ID and A socialised health system. Anyone of these is enough to test his popularity but if they are pushed in quick succession then you can bet that a scandal or impeachment will get him from office. Then we will have a whole new ballgame

What do you see in your crystal ball re these?? Perhaps I'm a donkey too, but I have no problem with fairness (more taxes on the rich, presumably) or warming taxes... never mind the warming, less foreign fuel imports willl help the balance of payments, will keep oil prices low (good for the economy) and work well for the national security agenda. However Real ID and Immigration I have no clue about... do you mean that there's a crackdown on the second and an expensive national ID card planned a la UK?? The socialised health system is good in theory but won't help keep deficits down in the short term.

I can see, however, that there are large tracts of the US voting population that won't like any of the above. Many of them probably voted for McCain/Palin however. So whether it dents Obama's core vote is questionable

The Fairness Doctrine relatesto the radio and TV media. They want to muzzle conservatives by making each station put a liberal on fpr equal time. This sounds fine but in the real world nobody wants to listen to the liberal so there is no add revenue. Air America was a liberal channel and it quickly went bankrupt.

Americans don't want socialised medicine. You do not find yanks flying to Ireland for treatment, do you.

Americans want the illegals rounded up and sent back. If they wanted to live in Mexico they would go down there.

youngdan wrote:

The Fairness Doctrine relatesto the radio and TV media. They want to muzzle conservatives by making each station put a liberal on fpr equal time. This sounds fine but in the real world nobody wants to listen to the liberal so there is no add revenue. Air America was a liberal channel and it quickly went bankrupt.

Americans don't want socialised medicine. You do not find yanks flying to Ireland for treatment, do you.

Americans want the illegals rounded up and sent back. If they wanted to live in Mexico they would go down there.

Americans are divided on the subject.

What is the purpose of this thread title? Is anyone seriously being asked that question?

Do you know what the word chimp means

A better answer than that by the morning or it will be modded.

I guess you don't know what a chimp is. It is a well tested term for a president to portray him as not having evolved mentally to that of modern man. So Bush was always drawn in cartoons as a chimp.



This is a good example

The thread is about whether Obama is a chimp. In other words is he an eejit who is clueless and will be a fall-guy

cactus have you not googled this ? It's causing a media crisis and a liberties of speech crisis in the US on the scale of Mohammed being sketched by Danish or Dutch cartoonists.

Is it ok to call Obama a chimp?
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20071212191114AA2ta05

NY Post cartoon of dead chimpanzee stirs outrage
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/02/18/AR2009021801163.html

Other forum discussing it here
http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message722775/pg1

And here
http://www.city-data.com/forum/elections/429398-obama-sock-monkey.html

And here: Board police remove obama/chimp thread, yet allow bush/chimp threads?
http://www.cafepharma.com/boards/showthread.php?t=228467

Quote :

Since everyone called Bush "The Chimp" is it ok to call Obama that?
Quote

That was the other thread title. Only ours asks if Obama is a chimp.

I would be happy with any of the thread titles in your post Auditor#6.

"Is it all right to call Obama a Chimp" would not bother me at all and would better describe the thread topic, I think.


Would you mind if it was changed to that, or something similar, youngdan/Auditor#9?

The chimp cartoon was on the news here, and I vaguely remember Curious George.

Youngdan has raised an interesting issue about what is acceptable insult of politicians and unacceptable insult.

I think youngdan is mainly asking if Obama is a fall guy, a stooge. The reference to the Chimp is an aside or a subplot. I think the question as it is is an interesting play on perceptions of racism but that's not the main question - the question is if Obama is a stooge.

The question as is has two meanings therefore - changing it to "Is Obama a stooge" is one debate and "Is it ok to call Obama a Chimp" is another question. It's provocative and meant to be. Is it distasteful?

It's a play on words and encompasses two debates. Interesting.

I'd be interested to hear what the other contributor to the thread has to say - Squire. And expat girl.

Me too.

Youngdan has no time for Obama. The chimp bit is mainly I think an intro to why youngdan thinks Obama is an idiot. The subplot is whether it is racist to call Obama a chimp, but to call Bush a chimp is OK. Bush was constantly pilloried for supposedly being stupid.

The title is missing a few words. Is anyone seriously asking if Obama is a chimp?

Curious George was mischievous, cuddly and likeable btw.

This could get very interesting. From a sociological viewpoint.

We could refer to Obama as a tiger, that would be considered a good thing and not in the least demeaning. Yeah, tigers are cool (except in Ireland, at the moment).

We could refer to Bush as a chimp and we'd be insulting chimps everywhere. However, if we refer to Obama as a chimp, we possibly introduce racist undertones. I'm reminded of the idea that says that if you seat enough chimps in front of typewriters, you'll eventually get the complete works of Shakespear. I doubt very much if you you'd get the same result if you were to line up folks of the same calibre as American presidents, past and present, in front of typewriters, from now till eternity. So for me "chimp" doesn't quite cut it.

"Pig" would be better.

Some folks might be upset at my referring to God's representative on Earth as a pig. Yet we talk of Irish pigs feeding at the trough all the time.

I dunno...

We have folks personifying their pets and others who remove the humanity from people. It's as if we want to make the likes of "Animal Farm" and "Charlottes Web" our reality. Does reality suck that much?

Or are we addicted to hyperbole?

cactus flower wrote:

The title is missing a few words. Is anyone seriously asking if Obama is a chimp?

I think the title is fine - it's provocative and you are inclined to find out what is meant by the word Chimp because obviously no one would call Obama a "Chimpanzee" and it would not be tolerated. We don't use the word "Chimp" here - it's an American word. We use "monkey" don't we ? So you google around on google or google around on youtube.

You find out George Bush was also referred to as a "Chimp", but is that what youngdan is referring to ? I think there's a little bit more to it than asking simply "Is Obama a dumbass" ...

Do you think there could be another Civil War in the U.S. cactus ?

Yes, and everywhere else as well.

Are Irish politicians pigs?