# Tom Hanks=racist?



## billc (Mar 20, 2012)

Apparently,  Tom Hanks isn't satisfied with just alienating conservative fans of his work, or veterans who fought in the pacific against the Japanese, now he wants to offend African Americans.  The following video shows Tom Hanks and former eagles singer Glenn Frey being "insensitive" when it comes to African Americans...does this video make Tom Hanks and Glen Frey racists?

http://dailycaller.com/2012/03/20/tom-hanks-glenn-frey-in-2004-racial-shocker-blackface-jokes-at-fundraising-auction-video/

Just imagine if a close friend of George Bush had done something like this, just before an election...

How many racists does Obama hang out with anyway?


----------



## Sukerkin (Mar 20, 2012)

And the prize for celebrity gossip current affairs goes to ...


----------



## Omar B (Mar 20, 2012)

Wait.  Who?


----------



## MA-Caver (Mar 20, 2012)

First of all people tend to forget that Tom Hanks was first a comedian, before he took up more serious roles, i.e. Bosum Buddies, Splash, Bachelor Party, Big, et al, and while it's warped, he likely had done that little skit in *2004 *, that's what umm 7 years ago?? (and people are NOW starting to ***** about it???), as comedy. 
Secondly and I'll mention it again, it was done in 2004... why dredge up something that happened 7 years ago when they could've done it in 2005 or 2004 shortly after they done it? 

My gripe... how white comedians are seemingly forbidden to make racist jokes but black, hispanics, oriental comedians can and get big laughs with them and not worry about a backlash... even if they make fun of white people? 
Want equality? Make it so.

If Hanks were racist would he want to star in a movie where he has a black attorney defending his case (Philadelphia) ? A true racist wouldn't star in a movie like that, would they?


----------



## Sukerkin (Mar 20, 2012)

:chuckles:  Aye, the time-warp effect and the utter pointlessness of posting this as a political thread was what I was getting at above :lol:


----------



## billc (Mar 20, 2012)

Well, Tom Hanks produced the hit job on Sarah Palin, which was timed to come out during the time when the left believed she would be in the middle of the republican primaries.  Also, after obama grand standed on the "slut" comment, he then has Tom Hanks narrater his 17 minute campaign commercial.  Here you have obama getting help from hanks and hanks is caught doing something much worse than limbaugh, and yet, he still works with obama.  Tom hanks has joined in the political world, with both feet, and now he gets to have his behavior judged the same way he judges others.

Tom Hanks apologizes...

http://dailycaller.com/2012/03/20/eight-years-later-hanks-condemns-blackface-skit/



> In a statement to The Daily Caller, Tom Hanks denounced the blackface skit in which he appeared in 2004.
> On Tuesday morning TheDC published video of the charity event, in which Hanks and &#8220;The Eagles&#8221; musician Glenn Frey bantered with a white man in blackface, an Afro wig and a leopard-print toga.
> &#8220;I was blindsided when one of the parents got up on the stage in a costume that was hideously offensive then and is hideously offensive now,&#8221; Hanks&#8217; said in a statement provided by his [COLOR=green !important][FONT=inherit !important][COLOR=green !important][FONT=inherit !important]New [/FONT][/FONT][FONT=inherit !important][COLOR=green !important][FONT=inherit !important]York [/FONT][/COLOR][COLOR=green !important][FONT=inherit !important]City[/FONT][/COLOR][/FONT][/COLOR][/COLOR] publicist.
> &#8220;What is usually a night of food and drink for a good cause was, regrettably, marred by an appalling few moments,&#8221; said Hanks, who is a prominent supporter of President Barack Obama.
> ...




Remember as well, that Tom Hanks criticized the marines and soldiers who fought the japanese in the pacific theater of world war 2 for fighting the war differently because the Japanese weren't white.  So hanks has no room to play racial jokes and make comments that slander real men who fought in some of the worst combat in world war 2.

Here is Hanks slandering the men who fought in the pacific...

http://voices.yahoo.com/tom-hanks-pacific-controversy-5636224.html?cat=37



> In an interview in Time Magazine with Douglas Brinkley, which concerned the upcoming Pacific War miniseries, Hanks descended to Hollywoodlefty argot when he said this about World War IIin the Pacific.
> "Back in World War II, we viewed the Japanese as 'yellow, slant-eyed dogs' that believed in different gods. They were out to kill us because our way of living was different. We, in turn, wanted to annihilate them because they were different. Does that sound familiar, by any chance, to what's going on today?"
> One can only hope that those words were inartfully expressed or perhaps even misquoted. But they are out there and thus far Hanks had not chosen to clarify or, as many are now demanding, apologize for what appears to be a slander of not only the soldiers and Marines who fought in the Pacific but those who now fight against Islamist terror in Afghanistan and Iraq.



And Victor Davis Hanson discusses Tom Hanks and his attack on our guys in the pacific...

http://tundratabloids.com/2010/03/victor-davis-hanson-unloads-on-tom.html


> *[...]* How would Hanks explain the brutal Pacific wars between Japanese and Chinese, Japanese and Koreans, Japanese and Filipinos, and Japanese and Pacific Islanders, in which not hundreds of thousands perished, but many millions? In each of these theaters, the United States was allied with Asians against an Asian Japan, whose racially-hyped &#8220;Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere,&#8221; aimed at freeing supposedly kindred Asians from European and white imperialism, flopped at its inauguration (primarily because of high-handed Japanese feelings of superiority and entitlement, which, in their emphasis on racial purity, were antithetical to the allied democracies, but quite in tune with kindred Axis power, Nazi Germany.)​*[...] *One wonders &#8212; were they supposed to entice us into watching the upcoming HBO series on the Pacific theater? But if anyone is interested in the role of race on the battlefield, one could probably do far better in skipping Hanks, and reading instead E.B. Sledge&#8217;s brilliant memoir, With the Old Breed, which has a far more sophisticated analysis of race and combat on Peleliu and Okinawa, and was apparently (and I hope fairly ) drawn upon in the HBO series. (Sledge speaks of atrocities on both sides in the horrific close-quarter fighting on the islands, but he makes critical distinctions about accepted and non-accepted behaviors, the differences between Japanese and American attitudes, and in brilliant fashion appreciates the role of these campaigns in the larger war. One should memorize the last lines of his book.)​





> In Hanks&#8217; case, he is either ignorant and has done little real research, or in politically-correct fashion has taken a truth about combat in the Pacific (perceptions of cultural and racial difference often did intensify the savagery of combat) and turned it into The Truth about the origins and conduct of an entire war &#8212; apparently in smug expectation that such doctrinaire revisionism wins applause these days in the right places (though I doubt among the general public that he expects to watch the series.)
> All in all, such moral equivalence (the Japanese and the U.S. were supposedly about the same in their hatreds) is quite sad, and yet another commentary on our postmodern society that is as ignorant about its own past as it is confused in its troubled present.


----------



## Sukerkin (Mar 20, 2012)

Mate, really, honestly, is this how you are going to spend the rest of your life?  Being politically aware and active is one thing, being a fanatic is quite another.  It's not healthy.

Politics is very simple.  Most politicians start out with decent intentions and then the 'machine' grinds them down until they are the levers of special interests.  That applies whatever the political colour they front for.  All you can do as a voter is cast your largely irrelevant hat into the ring that represents the presented basket of policies that offends you least this time around.

If you vote one way always for some ideological 'lie' that you tell yourself then you are being too swayed by the story-tellers and spin-doctors.

Democracy is a terrible way to run a country; you always end up with corruption and 'leaders' that are the self-promoting puppets of those with the money to ensure they get what they want.  It's sole advantage is that the very vacillating mess produced by voter apathy and the short-term memories of many that *do* bother to vote means that extreme goals are hard for vested interests to achieve.  That confused middle is what, in the end, gives a federal republic style democracy some form of longevity and stability.

It's the best you can hope for if you don't have a Parliamentary Democracy where the 'sheet-anchor' of a non-elected Upper House and the 'keel' of a Monarchy helps smooth out the bumps.


----------



## billc (Mar 20, 2012)

Yes, and the history of British politics is no more pretty than ours...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_political_scandals


----------



## Sukerkin (Mar 20, 2012)

Did you hear that sound, BillC?  I think that was my point flying overhead unheeded.  Put away your defensiveness, it is defending against the wrong thing.

As I've said to John and Don over the years, when they were beating the mono-political drum too loudly and too often, you are clearly not stupid.  If you were a passionate teenager it might be more comprehensible to have such a binary view of the political world but you are not.  You have experience and learning and an abiding interest in the political process.  

But that does not show through when all you post is thinly veiled anti-Democrat-pro-Republican tabloid propaganda.  People do not mould their political views through such avenues; such an approach only serves to harden divides rather than encourage true thought on issues of importance.


----------



## Josh Oakley (Mar 20, 2012)

Bill... The existence of problems with sukerkin's government don't negate his points on ours, whether or not he is actually right. Red herring.

Sent from my ADR6350 using Tapatalk


----------



## granfire (Mar 20, 2012)

MA-Caver said:


> First of all people tend to forget that Tom Hanks was first a comedian, before he took up more serious roles, i.e. Bosum Buddies, Splash, Bachelor Party, Big, et al, and while it's warped, he likely had done that little skit in *2004 *, that's what umm 7 years ago?? (and people are NOW starting to ***** about it???), as comedy.
> Secondly and I'll mention it again, it was done in 2004... why dredge up something that happened 7 years ago when they could've done it in 2005 or 2004 shortly after they done it?
> 
> My gripe... how white comedians are seemingly forbidden to make racist jokes but black, hispanics, oriental comedians can and get big laughs with them and not worry about a backlash... even if they make fun of white people?
> ...




Compared to the Romney dog incident, this is brand new!


----------



## billc (Mar 22, 2012)

This article really points out the essence of the tom hanks black face stunt...

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Hollywood/2012/03/22/Hanks-Apologizes-To-Bill-Oreilly

For emphasis...



> Which brings me to an even more important point. If you've seen "Game Change," which Hanks produced, you've seen how run-of-the-mill Republicans are portrayed as a hateful, racially-driven mob towards President Obama. This isn't Hanks attacking a public figure like Palin, this is an attack on everyday Americans from a guy who we now know palled around Mr. Blackface.





> I am a 46 year-old Caucasian conservative Republican. I am a proud card carrying member of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy. I have lived in the American South for over ten years. And yet, behind closed doors or otherwise, I have never seen anyone parade around in blackface. I have never seen anyone parade around in an afro wig while carrying a stuffed gorilla. I have never seen anything close to what I saw on that video
> Just the thought of this occurring in any circle I've ever been a part of wouldn't be tolerated. But at some elite Pacific Palisades school this nauseating display was tolerated in front of a crowd of laughing people with two celebrities taking part -- one of them making a "basketball" joke.
> Watch the video again. You can see Mr. Blackface standing in the back of the room waiting to come on. So I'm not buying Hanks' "blindside" argument, and I'm certainly not buying the argument coming from others that Hanks was in a tough spot and only played along so he wouldn't make things awkward and ruin the evening.
> You want to know why I'm not buying that? Because what should've ruined the evening and made things awkward was THE GUY PARADING AROUND IN BLACKFACE.





> Watch the video again, no one in the crowd even groans when the spotlight hits Mr. Blackface.
> The same corrupt media that declares the use of the term "food stamps" as racist, wants so desperately to buy the notion that this was nothing more than an awkward, regrettable moment. But what it really is is a bunch of rich, white elites -- behind closed doors -- yukking it up as one of their own parades around in one the cruelest stereotypes imaginable.



This article really makes the point about this incident with hanks and why it is important for people to know about it...


----------

