GOP activist uses Facebook to compare first lady to gorilla
Jokes are funny things.
Sometimes the same joke works with one person and falls flat with another. Sometimes, though, the joke just isn't funny at all.
That can be forgotten when it's made in the company of friends over a gin, a tonic, and a country club bar.
Perhaps, though, it is less easily forgotten when it is made on Facebook. What is said on Facebook stays on Facebook. Often for quite some time.
You see, according to a report by WIS10 TV in Columbia, S.C., Rusty DePass, a prominent Republican Party activist, happened to see a Facebook post by an aide to state Attorney General Henry McMaster.
The post described an escape by a gorilla on Friday from the Riverbanks Zoo in Columbia.
DePass, once a state Senate candidate, responded to the post with these words: "I'm sure it's just one of Michelle's ancestors - probably harmless."
The TV station reported that it had received confirmation from DePass that he had, indeed, been speaking of the first lady, Michelle Obama.
One might have thought that, having written these words, he might have attempted to make a swift correction. However, it appears to have taken a blogger, Will Folks, to obtain a screen capture of the comment for an apology to be forthcoming.
Once his FITSNews.com site raised the issue, it was taken up by other media outlets.
Only then did DePass issue an apology: "I am as sorry as I can be if I offended anyone. The comment was clearly in jest."
There's jest. And then there's clear jest.
Columbia Mayor Bob Coble appears to have seen no clear jest at all. He told WIS10: "You know, I think the comment is inappropriate. It's a racist comment."
DePass also reportedly suggested that it was the first lady who initially made the comment about everyone being descended from apes. However, media organizations have tried to find these comments, without--at the time of writing--any success.
WIS10 said that DePass' comment had been removed from Facebook, as had his Facebook page.
There is, as far as I am aware, no reason to believe that DePass attempted, in the vanity URL race on Saturday, to bag Facebook.com/socialmediahalfwit.
Chris Matyszczyk is an award-winning creative director who advises major corporations on content creation and marketing. He brings an irreverent, sarcastic, and sometimes ironic voice to the tech world. He is a member of the CNET Blog Network and is not an employee of CNET. 





- by dadburnit June 15, 2009 8:37 AM PDT
- Evolutionists are funny (i.e. peculiar not ha ha). They postulate/perpetuate/indoctrinate a worldview that belittles the dignity of humanity and then b!tch about the consequences of their philosophy. Neither the "jest" nor this headline make sense unless one assumes (macro)evolution. Think about it.
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
-
- by lordmorgul June 15, 2009 8:52 AM PDT
- The reality people that are willing to assume in order to explain the cosmos without God is truly incredible is it not?
- Like this
-
- by pjhenry1216 June 15, 2009 11:19 AM PDT
- @dadburnit: Folks who believe in evolution don't perpetuate anything that belittles the dignity of humanity. The rest of humanity does a good job of that on its own and doesn't need any help. Also, this "jest" could actually make sense without assuming evolution (i wonder at your purpose of distinguishing macro and micro, as if one is clearly logical and another isn't) if you just assume he meant that she looks like a gorilla in his opinion, which isn't racist at all if he honestly believes that. People said that Dubya looked like a Chimp. However, its racist when one assumes that someone who is black is less evolved than those that are not. If this was his intent, then its racist. While yes, that only makes sense when you assume evolution, its not an inherent problem. Its a matter of someone saying someone else is less evolved. It has nothing to do with the "consequences" of the *theory*.<br /><br />@lordmogul: To assume that evolution and (a/your/someone else's) God are mutually exclusive shows a lack of creativity and a lack of faith in what *your* God is capable of. I'd imagine there are folks who believe their God to be completely capable of this and not question their God's methods. If evidence shows you one thing is true and you had believed your God to do something in an otherwise different fashion based on no evidence, is it your place to question what evidence has shown your God has actually done? At what point did you decide you were able to better understand God more so than God itself?<br /><br />I find creationist's positions to be particularly contradictory and blasphemous in this regard. Your God shows you something truly beautiful and complex as nature and you assume its the work of the devil or is false information because it doesn't fit into what *you* think should be the case. Stop trying to define God and let God define itself. God doesn't need your approval, permission, or faith to know who It is and what It is capable of doing.
- Like this
-
- by Jeremy Chappell June 15, 2009 2:12 PM PDT
- So what are all those old bones about? God put them there to throw us off? Be serious. Just because one believes Genesis is allegorical doesn't make one "God-less". Seriously, you were made from clay? The universe was made in seven days? The dinosaurs didn't exist? What the heck are you smoking?<br /><br />Evolution is the best scientific theory to explain the world as we find it. Are there wholes in it? Sure, it doesn't explain everything, but nothing else comes close. Animals (and humans) have adapted over time.<br /><br />What I don't understand is where the heck human dignity comes into it? So we're all a product of "step wise refinement" where is the lack of dignity? Why do you cling to the belief that humans were always as they are now, when so clearly that wasn't the case, proto-humans existed (we find their bones, but we don't find "human" bones from the same timeframe - where were the humans?)<br /><br />Why does this argument mean God can't exist?
- Like this
-
Showing 1 of 2 pages (69 Comments)