Governor Ralph Northam is being pressured to resign over a 35 year old photograph. At the time, what he was doing was considered a joke in poor taste, but today it is a "hate crime." Who among us is so perfect?

Unless he committed a crime (especially a violent crime) he shouldn't have to resign. I may strongly disagree with him politically, but being a "racist" isn't a crime. The people voted him into office and he should be there until he's voted out.

I agree. I dislike him. I do not want to see a trend where a decades old behavior becomes a basis for removing people from office. Kavanagh was enough.

Kavanaugh wasn't enough. It was just the beginning. Remember who opened Pandora's box.

That's threatening violence. Different than just believing a certain group of people are not equal to you. I get where you're coming from, but threatening to mow them all down is an actual threat.

That being said, Northam is an alleged racist. We can't just claim something about someone and take that as proof. This happens way too much lately and it's sickening.

He was in black face next to a kkk member. but i dont think he should have to resign.

From what I remember of the picture, it was intended as humor. Disgraceful humor, but in 1984 that kind of thing was more accepted. Going back in time to to call it a hate crime is almost as silly as expecting people to be perfect.

My first thought on seeing the yearbook photo is that it was done as a sight gag, with the "Klan" guy and the "black" guy posing together as best buddies, drinking beer together.

I've always had a heavy, muscular build, and I can imagine someone telling me about an upcoming costume party 35 years ago:

"Hey, JR, I've got the perfect idea! You should go as a cartoon Arab with robe, thick beard and mustache, and holding a fearsome scimitar. We'll pose you with a big grin on your face and your arm around your skinny friend Epstein here--he'll be dressed as a Hasidic Rabbi and holding the Torah. You can be eating bacon and drinking beer together--It'll be hilarious!"

I would have done it...

No, it wasn't more accepted back then.

Then please explain why "Soul Man" (1986) starring C Thomas Howell Exists?
or "The Toy" (1982) in which Richard Pryor was Purchased by Jackie Gleason
or "Carbon Copy" (1981) with Denzel Washington was released with that Title (From what i recall, while dealing with race, the plot unlike the other two isn't nearly as 'touchy', but the title is explicitly a Racial Double Entendre)

Soul Man and the The Toy met heaps of negative criticism because of it, and both floundered in the Box Office because of it.
Carbon Copy who what?

I gave you more than enough information on 'Carbon Copy' so don't "who what?"

and my point still stands that even if they were ultimately not 'Accepted' the fact that they were Made, Marketed and Released in the first place means that quite a few people IN HOLLYWOOD deemed them 'Acceptable'

the only thing i 'googled' (IMDb actually) was the Years the films came out ...

I knew them all as products of the 80s, but I wanted to be factually accurate

Shit, my bad, somehow I misread what you said about Gleason purchasing... then the description of Carbon Copy.

I'll delete and redo that minus that bit if you want.

I can delete it but acknowledge I egged my face with a rewrite.

*****Rewrite: I misunderstood something and falsely accused you of something in terms of info gathering, so egg on my face and my apologies.*****

I had totally forgotten about Carbon Copy.

Hollywood, the cesspool of degeneracy? Let me guess, they weren't a sleazepit back then, then?

Remember the TV miniseries "Amerika" from 1987? Remember "Rocky IV (The Third World War)" from 1985? They made lots of things that the public decried, and those 2 would have been all the rage if it wasn't for the timing. In fact, latest chapter in Stallone's "Creed" has Apollo's son going at none other than Drago's son last year because yet again it is not uncool to think Russia is not simply a misunderstood child with the PC crowd.

Interesting fact: Hollywood studios deliberately make bombs. That's why some movies from script to promotion outright suck so bad, you couldn't even get meth heads to go if you gave them a years supply.
As money losers, they lower their tax bracket, so actually help with overall profit.
Remember, Leonard 6 was also made, marketed and released despite Bill Cosby begging people not to waste their money on it because it was shit, AND HE PRODUCED AND STARRED IN IT!

I think you're thinking of Tue 1960's and earlier. The 80's was a lot different than those periods. It was not acceptable.

If this was 1984, then the movie Silver Streak would have been one these fellas would remember. Gene Wilder wore shoe polish to pass as black. The film was intended as a comedy. There are others listed above. When I said "acceptable" I meant that you could get away with it, not that is or was "okay." Apparently, whoever published the yearbook thought it was okay.

That's what he gets for deviating
from the accepted leftist stance on extremist abortion.

He's just being used as sacrifice to make sure the rest of the Dems understand what is expected of them. The DNC has probably had that picture since he started playing politics.

Good one! lol