Well Mencia’s show has been canceled, but fear not lovers of unbelievably lame racist jokes that serve no purpose whatsoever, because Comedy Central just premiered Jeff Dunham’s new show! And not only that, it’s the channel’s highest rated premiere. Ever.

For the lucky uninitiated, Dunham is a ventriloquist who uses his puppets as vehicles to be racist, etc. Here’s a clip of one of his signature characters, Achmed the Dead Terrorist.

Really, I’m trying my hardest to keep my brain inside of my head, you know, since it exploded.

Even other comics who have shows on Comedy Central are lamenting over his high ratings, such as Daniel Tosh on his Twitter feed.

I can go on and on about how horrible the comedy is itself, and honestly, if you don’t already see how racist it is, then I suggest you move on from hateonme.com.

But he can’t be racist, his best friend is black!

The thing is, there are many terrible comics with similar jokes. Some are able to push it further than others. Like Mencia, for instance. People felt comfortable laughing at him calling Mexicans “wetbacks” because he’s Latino with a Spanish name. He even changed his name from “Ned” to “Carlos” in an effort to “Mexican it up” (his words, not mine) and use his ethnicity as a free pass, to say things whites and others couldn’t. With Dunham, he does the same thing as Mencia, and uses a puppet as the medium to put forth material that normally would get him booed off the stage. So people don’t realize it’s still him talking?

Apparently the art of ventriloquism continues to boggle the minds of grown adults.

What I really want to point out is how many people actually like this crap (5.3 million viewers during the first episode) and what this says about America. If I can’t even trust the masses to pick a good comedy show, how the hell am I supposed to trust them when it comes to picking what’s best for my health care?

Comedy Central should have a constitutional monarchy.

To be fair, Dunham recognizes that his show “has no socially redeeming value whatsoever.” And then he goes on to say:

“You’re not going to learn anything. All you’re going to do is have a big goofy time and escape your problems for a while.”

You know, as long as you’re white.

For instance, it’s one of the few occasions in which it’s not only socially acceptable but socially required for young women to add the word “slutty” to the beginning of any custom idea, such as slutty nurse, slutty police officer, slutty nun…

Or slutty Finding Nemo

Being a “sexy” woman for Halloween is really just an extension of being a “cute” girl on Halloween. But pssht. I dunno about you, but I was raised by immigrant parents who understood Halloween as a holiday whose sole purpose was to be scary. In my childhood, there was no room for fairies or princesses or cats.

I swear to you, I wore a mask like this as an 8-year-old.

Halloween  has instead become an excuse to deflect any charge of being offensive, sexist, racist or ignorant. Behind those masks and costumes, people feel comfortable in letting their true selves come out.

For instance, take this “illegal alien” costume which is causing outrage ‘round the Inter-webs.

Outrage because it's not sexy enough.

Some people like to appropriate other cultures on Halloween, whether it’s to showcase your cultural diversity:

Doesn't she make the cutest Arab?

Or  showcase your coolness, as with “Infants’ Future Hip-Hopper costume:”

For only $19.99, your child, too, can look like a stand-in on the movie "You Got Served."

I don’t know what I’m more offended by, the lame attempt to appropriate hip hop culture in the year 2009 or the fact that this costume could be easily achieved with $5 and a trip to the thrift store. At least there’s no blackface involved, am I right?

Yeah, save that for college rush.

So I, The Elahater, call upon the masses to take Halloween back. I say nay to the sexy costumes and nay to the racism. We’re supposed not supposed to be angering each other on the 31st, we’re supposed to be terrifying each other.

Although gotta admit, few things are scarier than this.

… at least not yet. We’re down but not out, so keep your eyes open and be sure to follow us on Twitter for hates within 140 characters.

Thanks to the overreaction of some Missourians, some people will never know the “Seven Best Places To Smooch” in St. Louis. That’s because the readers of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch Go! Magazine couldn’t help but get past the subjects on the cover, Chris Spencer and Emilee Murphree, a real-life couple who have been together for over two years:

Apparently, reality is too real

The country’s ignorant superstars came out in droves to the article message board to offer their words of wisdom like the one below with–as always–no logic or reason to back their belief:

From 1buschstadiumplz: “Haven’t read the story but dont (sic) like to see blacks and whites kissing;”

This is a classic example of someone who took the time to comment but didn’t even bother to read the damned article, and yet admitted it. Clearly I’d be giving these people the benefit of the doubt if I thought they used their brain before speaking. Luckily the couple’s friends and family came to their defense. But the comment from the guy below probably angered me the most:

Reader greggh tried a middle-of-the-road approach:  “I’m not judging the concept of biracial couples at all, but in a city as racially polarized as St. Louis, I’m shocked that the PD would go so out of its way to be so gratuitously provacative. This completely undercut the message of the article.”

The fact this person implies that the only reason Go! posted this picture WAS to stir controversy makes me want to smack him as hard as the other people who have a problem with it for no reason at all. Why was the couple chosen?

The magazine’s production designer chose Chris Spencer and Emilee Murphree—who have been together for 2 1/2  years—-because he knew them and believed they would make a great model for illustrating the story. Greenbaum said nobody gave it another thought.

This isn’t meant to be provocative and if you think it is maybe you should start learning how to use a walking stick because you’re going to see more people like Chris Spencer and Emilee Murphree and blindness is your best option.

And your best option isn't looking too good

As of four years ago there were 422,000 marriages of black and white individuals making up 7 percent of the United States’ 59 million marriages. In 1970 there were 65,000 marriages between blacks and whites. And remember that was four years ago. Since then we’ve even had a successful black woman and a white man fall in love in a full length-film.

Until you can provide a logical explanation for why interracial relationships should be outlawed again–other than the fact you want to reach through the screen and whoop the daylights out of the oldest, brattiest child from Jon & Kate Plus 8–then please get over yourself. The only thing I’ll permit both races to gripe about is Brigitte Nielsen and Flavor Flav for obvious reasons.

A lot of problems here, and race is the least of 'em

The opposite of marriage is clearly not divorce.

Or single life.

It’s gay marriage, you idiot. Well, it is according to Carrie Prejean, the intellectual giant and premiere legal scholar of this or any other century. Prejean happens to be Miss California, and here’s her reasoned deduction of the constitutional merits of marriage.

Prejean responded to a question posed by Perez Hilton, the guru of interwebs-based Hollywood gossip and someone who’d like to, one day, get opposite married. Because he’s opposite heterosexual. You can say “gay” for short.

I should have stuck with the Somali pirates question.

Hilton proceeded to decapitate Miss California via video blog, calling her response “the worst answer in pageant history” and calling Prejean a “dumb bitch.” Hilton later opposite criticized her, or apologized.

Then Hilton opposite apologized. And he called Prejean the c-word, which I don’t like, so I won’t write. No matter how much he wants to waterboard Miss California, Hilton should try not to be an opposite decent human being.

You have to give it to Prejean – who finished runner up in the contest – for winning over the crowd. The audience erupted when she said she supports the traditional view of marriage. Hilton and the other three opposite marriage advocates in attendance were disheartened – made clear by Hilton’s post-answer look. It’s priceless. It’s a concoction of anger, humiliation and astonishment at Miss California’s new catchphrase.

I can actually see this phrase catching on in teeth-gnashing living rooms across the planet.

I want an opposite marriage!

With gay marriage passing muster recently in Iowa and Vermont, I’m sure Hilton thought his question was a cinch – a chance to hear a Miss USA contestant say that she was alright with two girls or dudes getting hitched. Instead, he got the opposite.

Try again in 40 years, Perez.

Prejean shouldn’t be hated on for her opposition to gay marriage. After all, she’s among the majority of Californians who made a special effort last fall to ensure boys don’t marry boys any time soon. My hate stems from her refusal to utter the words “gay marriage” and her answer’s utter lack of substance.

It’s gotta be tough to tackle a sticky wicket like gay marriage in a minute, but Prejean could have mentioned something — anything — about the pros and cons of bringing the issue to ballot measure, passing legislation in statehouses or having the courts decide the matter.

Instead, bupkis. My family thinks it’s wrong, she said, so I think it’s wrong. Good night, Miss USA! Drive home safely.

No matter how cringe-inducing Prejean’s marriage classification system was, she beat the hell out of Miss Teen South Carolina’s answer in 2007, when she broke down why “U.S. Americans” sometimes don’t have access to maps and therefore cannot help countries such as “the Iraq,” South Africa and the “Asian countries.” Such as. Such as. Such as.

Prejean has her share of knights of journalistic honor defending her on various web sites, including some columnist named Mark Joseph. He points out that Prejean’s views on marriage are identical to those of President Obama and Elton John.

Except for one crucial part. Obama, I recall, never mentioned his opposition to opposite marriage on the campaign trail (he’s against gay marriage, which is an actual, working, real-life phrase). I seem to recall zero questions from debate moderators about the candidates’ feelings on the opposite of marriage.

I'll show you a little opposite marriage, Barack.

Prejean seemed queasy – terrified, perhaps – to say the dirty little phrase “gay marriage,” which, no matter what your stance is on the topic, you should be able to say when the validity of the institution is in question. Prejean later said that her sister is pro-gay marriage. She’s not gay, Prejean ensured her listening audience, but her sister advocates for gay people. Or something.

In an interview with Access Hollywood, Prejean said her answer “cost me my crown.” But clearly, it had nothing to do with her word choice. She may have lost Miss USA, but she’s a shoe-in for Martyr of the Year.

I started HateOnMe one year ago today. Thanks to all you loyal readers! The site ain’t easy work and has grown from a one-person operation to space to air comedic voices from various writers. I hoped it’s entertained you, started some dialogue and perhaps opened your eyes (and ours) a bit along the way.

Looking back, what was your favorite “hate” from this past year?

Another twist in the Slumdog Millionaire saga broke out this week when dad of 9-year-old actress Rubina Ali reportedly tried to sell his daughter for $300,000.

“On Sunday, Rubina’s mother Khurshid complained to us that her ex-husband was trying to sell her daughter, saying she saw some reports on television to that effect,” Deputy Commissioner of Police Nisar Tamboli told Reuters.

Here’s some background to this: in February  I discussed the compensation of two of the child actors in the hit movie compared to how much the movie made. The  $15 million budget film (funded in part by the European Union) grossed more than $60 million in sales. Two of the child actors (the poor ones) were paid about $900 and $1,000, which is more than standard wage earners in Mumbai slums, but comparable to what domestic workers in India make. Director Danny Boyle + producers set up trust funds for the kids and said they didn’t want to swoop in and drop tons of money on them because it could disrupt their lives in a drastically negative way. Kids can get to trust fund money once they finish school.

Which I hear is easy to accomplish while living in a slum

So this is what the dad told the undercover reporter who found all this out:

“We’ve got nothing out of [Slumdog Millionaire],” Qureshi told the News of the World reporter. “They gave some money at the start, but they gave nothing afterwards. They gave us around 150,000 rupees [$3,000]. I have to consider what’s best for me, my family and Rubina’s future.” Rubina’s father is a day laborer who earns around $5 a day. He insists he wasn’t trying to sell his daughter.

Now, at HateOnMe, we’re vehemently against child trafficking (bold stance, I know). It’s a huge and very serious problem in India as in other parts of the world. And if Rubina’s father is actually doing this, he is likely acting out of a situation of utter poverty (and there may be some gender inequality issues thrown in there for good measure).

An underlying issue is ironically mentioned and condemned in the film itself. (Potential spoiler:) In the movie, orphaned kids were taken in by a man looking to basically pimp them out as beggars. They were put into this circumstance because of factors beyond their control (poverty, war, violence). Some of these kids were mutilated to get more money since disabled kids garner more sympathy. More sympathy = more money. And in real life, poor cute kids = more sympathy/heart-rendering plot = more successful movie. Just sayin’.

I saw Slumdog Millionaire and I won’t lie, the movie was entertaining. But as more and more reports surface, I’m starting to feel mad uncomfortable with the film and premise. I don’t think it necessarily glorified life in the slums (getting your hands cut off and being blinded by acid is no picnic even with a MIA-heavy soundtrack), but it did capitalize off the cuteness of the kids and it feels kinda like exploitation to me when they aren’t being compensated properly for it.

"Big smiles, kids, but don't hold onto those statues too tightly."

If nothing else changes in our global economy, how do we then expect impoverished people to climb out of poverty when they aren’t, at the very least, compensated for their work?

On "Who Wants to be a Millionaire," dumbass.

And here we are, audiences of the world, dropping $10 to see cute poor kids and their struggle to triumph against the odds. I don’t know about you all, but I felt inspired and powerless at the same time.

So this weekend I took a break from hating in order to patronize the arts at the Inked Souls sneaker art show in D.C. Aside from the artwork, DJs, b-boys and all, there were barbers giving attendees free shape-ups and fades on-site. One of our biggest fans (and biggest haters we know) decided to take advantage of the opportunity and got the HateOnMe logo shaved onto his head. Big-up to World Class Cuts on 4th & K St. N.W. in D.C. for the work.

(Photos by Curtis Alia)

That sets the standard pretty high for the rest of you. Tattoo, anyone?

Apparently Mexico’s ambassador to Spain will think twice before he takes a trip to the BK Lounge. He got understandably pissed when he discovered the commercial below:

Yeah I don’t think I need to try it to understand it. I can practically smell the racism from outside the drive-thru window. But Burger King was shocked at the response:

Burger King said the ads were meant to show a mixture of influences from the southwestern United States and Mexico, not to poke fun at Mexican culture, but said it would replace them “as soon as commercially possible.”

Wait a second…these ads were not meant to poke fun at Mexican culture? I think the fact his nickname was “Just a Little Bit” and he practically looked like a dwarf might push some buttons. Plus now all I see when I close my eyes is a picture of Jack Black in a wrestling costume. And it’s not pretty.

It already came but I vomited just the same.

Unfortunately, this is not the first time this has happened in the world of fast food advertising and by far the black community has been assaulted the most.  I guess McDonalds felt guilty about having only that one commercial out of the year where they light a bunch of candles to honor Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and is trying to overcompensate? I don’t have a problem with increasing black presence in commercial ads but can they show us eating a McRib, a Filet-O-Fish, a friggin’ cobb salad…basically anything else besides poultry for a change?

How about this one with a bunch of black women feeling satisfied from their chipotle chicken wraps:

or THIS:

Besides the fact this looks like an excerpt from Fresh Prince of Bel Air: The Middle School Years, this one pisses me off for a variety of reasons…

(1) It’s not even funny
(2) The dad just looks a little TOO interested in this…and
(3) He has absolutely no pop and lock rhythm. If you’re going to stereotype at least be accurate.

Watch out or he's going to attempt the "Charlie Brown" and spill dipping sauce all over his new track pants

Maybe Burger King is also trying to reach underrepresented minority populations with this Texican burger but if they could do us all a favor and stick to those creepy ass commercials with the Burger King himself that would be great. It would also be great if Burger King could let me know whenever they plan to show the King so I know when to run into my room and assume the fetal position.

The price we pay for cultural sensitivity

And as if you haven’t had enough mass marketed chicken force fed down your gullet, here’s some more ads courtesy of the golden arches. And yes, these are all real:

THROWBACK: