Jackson Lee blasts 'demeaning' Pepsi Super Bowl ad

[ready4ONE 5,400]

I thought it very odd to use a black couple and white victim, and it would not have been much better with an all white or black cast. It was a dumb ad made dumber by poor casting.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

I don't like slapstick. Although... I do like Wipeout!

And I'm not moving away just because there are problems. America's answer to everything is to distance yourself if you can afford to. I can't get behind that. My answer is to live through it and work to resolve it. The situation in America's urban areas today isn't exactly what Dr. King envisioned when he said, "free at last." I doubt Malcolm X would be proud of the new traditions we're carrying on. Folks today have lost their way. And instead of working to make it better, we run away the first chance we get.

Very noble Slim. Life is too short for that BS. Nor do I have any intention of raising children in such conditions. That is why I got educated and chose a career that is not dependent on me living in any particular place, so I can choose where I WANT to live. I do not see a bad side to being able to choose where one WANTS to live. I think it is pretty much a personal decision and one we should reserve without being ridiculed as "running away". It may be "running to" as much as "running away"

The ability to have this opportunity is one of the things that makes the country great.

Besides, it may be possible for you to move away from there and improve BOTH places.

[Danno 1,228]

I thought it very odd to use a black couple and white victim, and it would not have been much better with an all white or black cast. It was a dumb ad made dumber by poor casting.

I take it you are not aware of the whole angst many Black chicks have with white gurls stealin their man?

[JohnSmith2007 353]

I don't see why anyone needs to notice the color of the actors skin. I thought we were past that by now. I guess some aren't.

[Amby 490]

my reaction was this just like this

[JohnSmith2007 353]

my reaction was this just like this

I didn't like the ad either. To hit someone with a can and run off is a criminal act. But race never entered my mind when I first saw it, it took Jackson to point that one out to me. It seems the very people that want equality are the very same ones that see racism where none exsists. In that case who is the racist?

[Amby 490]

I didn't like the ad either. To hit someone with a can and run off is a criminal act. But race never entered my mind when I first saw it, it took Jackson to point that one out to me. It seems the very people that want equality are the very same ones that see racism where none exsists. In that case who is the racist?

I didn't think race either. the first time I saw it was on this thread and even after seeing the thread title (without reading the actual thread), I was still like

eta: I was waiting for them to be eating fried chicken or something. then at the end I was like ughhh...what?

Edited February 10, 2011 by Amby

[_Simpson_ 250]

I thought it very odd to use a black couple and white victim, and it would not have been much better with an all white or black cast. It was a dumb ad made dumber by poor casting.

You response is proof that racial sensitivity in America is out of control.

[Danno 1,228]

I don't see why anyone needs to notice the color of the actors skin. I thought we were past that by now. I guess some aren't.

I admire those who are pure of heart.

Back in the real world we still have a club on Capital hill, to get in it you have to be.

1. An elected Senator or Congress person

2. Be the right color skin (they do check)

Obama was a former member.

Congressional Black caucus.

White membership

Over the years, the question has arisen, "Does the Caucus allow only black members?" Pete Stark, D-CA., who is white, tried and failed to join in 1975. In January 2007, Josephine Hearn reported in Politico that white members of Congress were not welcome to join the CBC.[8] Freshman Representative Steve Cohen, D-TN., who is white, pledged to apply for membership during his election campaign to represent his constituency, which is 60% African American. Hearn further reported that although the bylaws of the caucus do not make race a prerequisite for membership, former and current members of the Caucus agreed that the group should remain "exclusively black." Rep. William Lacy Clay, Jr., D-MO., the son of Rep. William Lacy Clay Sr., D-MO., a co-founder of the caucus, is quoted as saying, "Mr. Cohen asked for admission, and he got his answer. He's white and the Caucus is black. It's time to move on. We have racial policies to pursue and we are pursuing them, as Mr. Cohen has learned. It's an unwritten rule. It's understood." In response to the decision, Rep. Cohen stated, "It's their caucus and they do things their way. You don't force your way in." Clay issued an official statement from his office:

Quite simply, Rep. Cohen will have to accept what the rest of the country will have to accept – there has been an unofficial Congressional White Caucus for over 200 years, and now it's our turn to say who can join 'the club.' He does not, and cannot, meet the membership criteria, unless he can change his skin color. Primarily, we are concerned with the needs and concerns of the black population, and we will not allow white America to infringe on those objectives.

On January 25, 2007, Representative Tom Tancredo, R-CO., spoke out against the continued existence of the CBC as well as the Democratic Congressional Hispanic Caucus and the Republican Congressional Hispanic Conference saying, "It is utterly hypocritical for Congress to extol the virtues of a color-blind society while officially sanctioning caucuses that are based solely on race. If we are serious about achieving the goal of a colorblind society, Congress should lead by example and end these divisive, race-based caucuses."[9]

Funding

In late 1994, after Republicans attained a majority in the House, they announced plans to rescind funding for 28 "legislative service organizations" which received taxpayer funding and occupied offices at the Capitol, including the CBC. Then-chairman Kweisi Mfume protested the decision, which never went through.[11]

In February 2010, The New York Times reported the caucus received 55 million dollars in contributions from corporations between 2004 and 2008. Most of that money went to social events and the organization's headquarters building on Embassy Row. In 2007, it paid more to the caterer for a single event than it spent on scholarships.[12] Scholarships controlled by the caucus were a source of public concern in September 2009 when it was reported Sanford Bishop and other members directed the money to members of their families and political cronies.

The Times compared the amount of money spent on internships by the caucus ($378,000 in 2008) to the amount paid for the decorator of its annual prayer breakfast that year ($350,000).[12]

Contributors to the caucus include cigarette manufacturers, brewers, and the rent-to-own industry.[12]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congressional_Black_Caucus#White_membership

[ready4ONE 5,400]

I don't see why anyone needs to notice the color of the actors skin. I thought we were past that by now. I guess some aren't.

The tossing of the can and walking away after causing injury was plenty bad enough without having black actors do the deeds which only added to the poor taste of the ad.

Edited February 10, 2011 by ready4ONE

[Dakine10 5,452]

I didn't like the ad either. To hit someone with a can and run off is a criminal act. But race never entered my mind when I first saw it, it took Jackson to point that one out to me. It seems the very people that want equality are the very same ones that see racism where none exsists. In that case who is the racist?

I believe she (Lee) describes the commercial as insulting, demeaning, ridiculous, and not humorous. I only read what was reposted here but I don't see where anyone is claiming racism.

[TBoneTX 45,091]

The root of the situation is not the ad, but Jackson "Me" herself. Get between her and any television camera, and your life is in grave danger of immediately ending.

[Danno 1,228]

The tossing of the can and walking away after causing injury was plenty bad enough without having black actors do the deeds which only added to the poor taste of the ad.

THe lack of sense of humor is a real indicator of -how much progress we haven't made.... in many regards.

What are you suggesting, Blacks should never be cast in any role that could be viewed as negative because people might get the idea that Black folks might actually be capable of throwing a can of Pepsi or what ever?

If you are concerned that entertainment might be giving African Americans a bad image....... that commercial is barely on the scale compared to what is aired ... by blacks about Blacks on BET.

[ready4ONE 5,400]

You response is proof that racial sensitivity in America is out of control.

Your claim to have 'not noticed' the choice to use a black couple in the ad is not particularly credible. Nor does your attempt to use that bogus false claim make your claim noticing Pepsi's piss poor casting for a piss poor commercial aid you in your attempts to claim high moral ground for making said false claim.

Using a black couple to act out a scene of attempted domestic assault, which turns into an assault on an innocent bystander, further choosing to cast the assault victim as white, then having the black couple run from the scene adds an extra layer of poor taste and bad judgment to an already morally suspect advertisement.

The poor taste of the ad would barely improve regardless of the casting. DV isn't particularly amusing. But Pepsi chose to compound the problems with this ad.

[_Simpson_ 250]

Your claim to have 'not noticed' the choice to use a black couple in the ad is not particularly credible. Nor does your attempt to use that bogus false claim make your claim noticing Pepsi's piss poor casting for a piss poor commercial aid you in your attempts to claim high moral ground for making said false claim.

Using a black couple to act out a scene of attempted domestic assault, which turns into an assault on an innocent bystander, further choosing to cast the assault victim as white, then having the black couple run from the scene adds an extra layer of poor taste and bad judgment to an already morally suspect advertisement.

The poor taste of the ad would barely improve regardless of the casting. DV isn't particularly amusing. But Pepsi chose to compound the problems with this ad.

This video went through a lot of people before the approval and like me Im pretty sure they seen it as innocent. I find it funny that everyone wants to address this bogus racial intent but ignore the fact that this guy's character was betrayed as a spineless moron. If anything thats what I would of had a issue with.