Efren Carrillo Cartoon Caption Contest!

[Dixon]

Efren Carrillo has enough problems right now as it is. He is still part of the community- he could use a helping hand...It is easy to squash a fly laying on his back legs up.

Awwww, poor little innocent thing didn't do anything that might reasonably motivate folks to joke about him--right?

[edie]

Awwww, poor little innocent thing didn't do anything that might reasonably motivate folks to joke about him--right?

I do not remember calling him little, poor or innocent and I have nothing about jokes or being sarcastic about someone or situations, but I find a contest is a poor way of getting about it and at him.

[meherc]

I think it is ridiculous to compare Efren to a hardened criminal. yes, I have compassion for him. Alcoholism is a disease , how many times do you have to hear it before it sinks into your closed little minds..Would you think it's okay to mock someone with diabetes? It's easy to point the finger when you haven't walked in his shoes.

Do you feel the same sweet empathy for hardened criminals?

[meherc]

I can't believe what is supposed to be a progressive community can be so closed-minded and mean spirited when it comes to Efren Carillo. My, how the worm turns. Efren has been a friend to our community, shows up to meet constituents and listen to them at most every nonprofit event. He immediately went to work when I was in trouble and asked him to help. No other politician would even answer my calls. I think he is a good man. I was sober for 25 years (till recently) and my motto then was "It seemed like a good idea at the time." He did his job , what he did in his private life is none of our business. Maybe the DA likes to wear all leather and chains when she's off duty. So what. Ain't nobody's business but my own.

[marcwordsmith]

I don't have a considered position regarding Mr. Carrillo, but I do feel strongly about the tone of our public discourse and what is considered acceptable and appropriate--in our community and in our country. What concerns me about your comment, Barry, is the oblique reference to the ubiquitous Anthony Weiner jokes that have been going nonstop for weeks and weeks in the mainstream media. To suggest that your caption contest is less nasty and puerile is, I think, setting kind of a low bar for this forum.

I mean, please, just let's be clear. This is mean humor. This is targeting a specific individual (one who, as a few of your forum participants have noted, is very likely suffering from mental/emotional problems to begin with) for a type of ruthless ridicule that most of us haven't seen in our real lives since junior high school. It is certainly not "just some fun" (as you put it) for the person who is the object of all this mockery, and I question whether it is harmless for the rest of us to pretend there is not something very unkind and callous in this.

Now you can say that Mr. Carrillo (like Weiner) is a public figure and therefore he "lets himself in" for it. Well, perhaps. Do different rules--regarding what constitutes decency in how we treat each other--apply to public figures? Apparently so, though I'm not clear who writes the rules--other than all of us, by consensus.

Two things strike me as indisputable: This is patently mean humor, and insofar as we indulge it without censure, we give license to some of our basest impulses.

As I write this, I realize I don't know where the line should be drawn between voluntary self-editing and repression. But at least let's call a spade a spade. It's mean.

This is just some fun. This is not as bad as the things that have been written elsewhere about Efren. And it may not be your cup of tea, Sandy and dialula. You are most welcome to unsubscribe from this thread, or continue to read this thread and post your comments.

If Efren was a higher profile politician, say a congressman, do you really think Jon Stewart, Colbert, even Leno, wouldn't be skewering him with even sharper comedy? Would that be inappropriate?

I think this is pretty tame and I appreciate the submissions so far.

[Dixon]

marcwordsmith, I've already addressed your concerns in my posts #27 and #28 in this thread, so I won't redundantly beat that horse; I refer you to them.

I have some questions for you, though.

If a few snarky jokes are too "mean" a response to what appears to be very serious and scary behavior, I suppose that anything like jail or losing his job or whatever must be out of the question, eh?

Do your characterizations of some of us (or at least our self-expression) as mean, nasty, puerile, ruthless, unkind, callous, and worthy of censure qualify as "mean" behavior on your part? If not, please share the criterion by which you assign your criticisms to the righteous side of the line and ours to the nasty side. Maybe you feel that if the criticism is humorous it's mean, or...?

You refer to "...what is considered acceptable and appropriate--in our community and in our country" and you say "I'm not clear who writes the rules--other than all of us, by consensus." Leaving aside your dubious assumptions about social acceptability and who writes the rules, I'll ask this: Could you be unaware that the national, and probably the local, consensus involves revering and richly rewarding Jay Leno, David Letterman, Conan O'Brien, and hundreds if not thousands of other humorists for regularly razzing public figures over their bad behaviors? Have you sent similar protestations to them, or are you just focusing on those of us who've posted here on Wacco? And, if the latter, are you being "mean"?

[occihoff]

The "jeering crowds" refers to those who are evincing delight by making cartoons about Carrillo's personal catastrophe. This clearly goes way beyond "disappointment." And yes, I do feel the same about comics on tv, but I have too many personal problems to deal with to write all the letters that I would like to. I don't know how you all are finding the time to go on and on with this thread. As for hardened criminals, yes I do feel the same "sweet empathy," but as I said in my post I have a harder time feeling compassion for hypocrites who bash others for the same thing they themselves do in secret.

You agree with sandoak, although you don't know what she means? This alone is enough for me to discount the rest of your post, but good heavens, man, don't you know the difference between citizens' disappointment with their elected official and "jeering crowds"? Inflammatory rhetoric seems to be your specialty, not that of the intelligent posters calling for Carrillo's resignation.

[podfish]

... As for hardened criminals, yes I do feel the same "sweet empathy," but ... I have a harder time feeling compassion for hypocrites.

hey, we all have our preferences about what are the biggest and most blame-worthy moral failings. You've stumbled into a situation where you're cool with where you draw the line, but are taking issue with where others do.
I submit that is dangerously close to hypocrisy!

people who value gentleness and kindness extremely highly seem to find those of us who don't, kind of inexplicable. To me it seems that where you lie on that spectrum correlates highly how much you value personal safety - those who value that highly also seem to find it inexplicable that others don't - or at least don't find attempts to guarantee it so compelling. So it makes coming to a consensus about what is appropriate comment and/or behavior rather difficult.

[occihoff]

Great metaphor, edie!

Yes, I agree.
Efren Carrillo has enough problems right now as it is.*
He is still part of the community- he could use a helping hand...
It is easy to squash a fly laying on his back legs up.

[occihoff]

I think Marc is right on. And Dixon, all I can say is I'm glad you weren't my dad!

[[email protected]]

I was thinking of deleting my post because it seems all posts have been misinterpreted as mean-spirited. My intent in submitting my caption was to give Efren the benefit of the doubt by airing a possible innocent explanation for his alleged conduct. Sleeping pills, such as Ambien, have been linked to bizarre sleepwalking behavior in the past:
https://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/08/business/08ambien.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Maybe he took a "hangover helper" after several drinks, hoping to sleep like a baby, and then had a weird dream where he ended up getting arrested. If this is what happened, I don't think he committed any crime.

This is the kind of "youthful indiscretion" that some privileged members of the Bush dynasty are able to get away with for decades. Efren is a brilliant overachiever and I suspect he overachieved when it came to partying. He may have gotten too close to the sun, like Daedalus.

If it turns out Efren took Ambien after drinking and engaged in bizarre conduct whilst sleepwalking, I could forgive him entirely provided he made a heartfelt apology to the woman who called the police in fear.

I agree we should not cast stones at fellow human beings. Let's give Efren the benefit of the doubt. If the police reports made it all as cut and dry as the recall-Efren-now camp assumes, why would the independent prosecutor from Napa County ask for more time to make a charging decision? According to police, no additional investigation has been requested or conducted, so it's not like the case has been continued for further investigation. If it was clear that a crime was committed, you can bet that charges would have been quickly filed.

Let's keep an open mind regarding Efren.

"After all those drinks, I was hoping that the Ambien would
help me sleep like a baby, but this dream is getting downright weird!"

[occihoff]

You make a good point, podfish. The nature or quality of any moral judgment depends on one's own emotional and intellectual personality and life experiences. Our social and political life consists of a constant dialog and struggle between impulses of kindness and impulses of anger. Neither of these emotions can work all by themselves in the real world. You can't just be nice when people are screwing you, there has to be a balance.

I'm not trying to tell other posters who have a more or less different slant on this issue that they are wrong. I'm just trying to present my point of view, which is rather more kind than some of the other posts, so that people can consider it and look into their souls and begin to question why they are finding so much pleasure in deriding someone who has done something crazy in an impulsive fit of drunkenness that has surely caused him great misery, and may have ruined a very promising career of a very talented man who apparently has many good qualities.

I'm doing this because I think it would be a better world to live in if people could feel more compassion for even those people who, like the rest of us, have come into this world as innocent babies but have been twisted by their life experiences into people who hurt other people.

Those of you who are dumping on Efren and turning him into a cartoon don't even know him personally, you are just jumping on this drunken escapade to cast him as a total jerk to be derided and humiliated. I would just like you to take a look inside yourself to see why this brings you pleasure. I also wonder what life experiences have led many of you to enjoy dumping on this man so much.

hey, we all have our preferences about what are the biggest and most blame-worthy moral failings. You've stumbled into a situation where you're cool with where you draw the line, but are taking issue with where others do.
I submit that is dangerously close to hypocrisy!...

[podfish]

..... I'm not trying to tell other posters who have a more or less different slant on this issue that they are wrong. I'm just trying to present my point of view, which is rather more kind than some of the other posts, so that people can consider it and look into their souls and begin to question why they are finding so much pleasure in deriding someone who has done something crazy.... I'm doing this because I think it would be a better world to live in if people could feel more compassion

I think that's a great statement of the type of thing this forum is good for.

Those of you who are dumping on Efren and turning him into a cartoon don't even know him personally, you are just jumping on this drunken escapade to cast him as a total jerk to be derided and humiliated. I would just like you to take a look inside yourself to see why this brings you pleasure. I also wonder what life experiences have led many of you to enjoy dumping on this man so much.

I suppose there are a few posts/posters who fit that - maybe they're there and just don't register much with me. But, not just on this site, but in our community as a whole, I see a lot of evidence that there's a large group that is perfectly comfortable with having Efren pay a price for the episode, probably including some ridicule, and very likely including loss of his current position, even though there's not any established criminal culpability. I don't notice a similarly large call for lynching or even for permanent disqualification from ever holding office. But he's now in a position where he's got to convince people he's a suitable representative for them (which given American politics seems quite likely to work out for him in the future). He certainly has forfeited any claim that he's got the support of his constituents right now, though. Making himself unavailable pretty much eliminates his voice from any ongoing debate, too.

[Dixon]

Great metaphor, edie!

Actually, Edie's fly-squashing metaphor was not at all apt in this case. Squashing an innocent fly is not analogous to making jokes about a human being who has apparently made, and acted upon, a very bad moral choice which has harmed someone. Richard, it seems from this and your other comments that you're loath to endorse social consequences for bad behavior. I respectfully submit that, ultimately, more harm than good is done to society by being too "nice" when someone's behavior requires disapprobation.

[Dixon]

I think Marc is right on.

To endorse Marc's position, presumably including his rather nasty characterization of me and others, while entirely side-stepping my relevant questions to which you were "responding", is not a constructive response.

And Dixon, all I can say is I'm glad you weren't my dad!

As is so often the case in discussions with New Agey types who project a "kind" image, your capacity for cruelty is starting to make itself apparent, however passive-aggressively.

[occihoff]

You only see a few posts/posters who are finding pleasure in dumping on Efren? I count 17 derisive cartoons on this page alone. And now you would-be cartoonists can all hate me for telling you that, frankly, I don't think any of these captions are particularly funny!

I suppose there are a few posts/posters who fit that

[occihoff]

Dixon, why do you love turning everybody's point of view into a ridiculous extreme, rather than focusing on whatever truth may be in it? I clearly endorse social consequences for bad behavior. Everybody does. Disapprobation is not the same thing as kicking someone when they're down, gloating over their misery, and turning their humiliation into a cartoon. I do not claim to be immune from this sort of emotion myself, but I think we need to look into ourselves and call a spade a spade: it's mean spirited, and to me it indicates a reservoir of anger in people that is currently finding an outlet in going beyond plain punishment for bad behavior into sadistic derision. I would like to see people look into these feelings in themselves and begin to wonder where they come from, rather than blindly projecting them on others. That's the therapist in me.

Actually, Edie's fly-squashing metaphor was not at all apt in this case. Squashing an innocent fly is not analogous to making jokes about a human being who has apparently made, and acted upon, a very bad moral choice which has harmed someone. Richard, it seems from this and your other comments that you're loath to endorse social consequences for bad behavior. I respectfully submit that, ultimately, more harm than good is done to society by being too "nice" when someone's behavior requires disapprobation.

[handy]

ultimately, more harm than good is done to society by being too "nice" when someone's behavior requires disapprobation

Absolutely! I'm in total agreement with this observation.

Had we demanded impeachment for treason of every rep who voted for the unconstitutional Patriot Act (Bush Era) and the NDAA (Obama Era), we wouldn't be so embroiled in the NSA, CIA, FBI police state mess in which we currently find ourselves.

Carrillo could have made an attempt to explain/ apologize for his behavior to his constituency within the day of the first reporting of the event. He chose to go into hiding, er..."rehab". He's open game. No sympathy.

[Dixon]

Dixon, why do you love turning everybody's point of view into a ridiculous extreme...

I don't think I'm doing that, though I'd be happy to consider it if you could provide a specific example. What I think I'm doing is explicating some of the implications of your statements--which you may be feeling defensive about.

...rather than focusing on whatever truth may be in it?

Richard, I don't think either of us has been very interested in "focusing on whatever truth may be in" whatever the other guy is saying in this discussion. We have both felt that it's more constructive to wrestle with the disagreements. My motivation has been to be better understood so I won't be hurt any more than I already have been by what seem to be harsh judgments from you and others, and to better understand your position by asking relevant questions and giving you the opportunity to clarify your positions and make your case for them. Your evasion of those relevant questions and endorsement of quite nasty characterizations of me and others (including in your latest post which I'm responding to here) has been frustrating and painful for me. Perhaps a reminder that we're both coming from a basic position of love and respect for one another can help refocus the discussion.

I clearly endorse social consequences for bad behavior.

I never said you didn't. My statement "...you're loath to endorse social consequences for bad behavior" reflects my perception that you're relatively slow to do so--and I think you agree with that, as you have stated in somewhat different words in a recent private email to me. Okay?

One thing I find confusing is your endorsement of things like jail and job loss as possibly appropriate responses to Carrillo's behavior while condemning those of us who indulge in joking about him--a much milder social consequence. It seems like what bothers you is not the intensity of the social consequence but rather the fact that we're enjoying applying it. Shaming bad behaviors is useful in making people less likely to repeat them, thus protecting others, and if it's a good thing to do, why the hell not enjoy it? There's a long and rich tradition of social satire based on that premise. If you prefer inflicting joyless consequences like jail and job loss--well, you're entitled to your preferences, but your judgment of us snarky jokers just seems hypocritical, especially in light of your insulting interpretations of us in your various posts. If you're gonna insult us, why not try to be funny? Perhaps you could do a cartoon of me with a funny caption...

Disapprobation is not the same thing as kicking someone when they're down, gloating over their misery...

These are needlessly negatively connoted ways to express what could just as well be called "razzing" or "engaging in social satire". Furthermore, any recognition of Carrillo's responsibility in creating the situation is absent from your discourse; you cast him as a victim of abuse by me and others. You seem to have more negative judgment on the jokers than on the guy who apparently tried to break into a woman's bedroom with (to put it politely) dubious intent.

I do not claim to be immune from this sort of emotion myself...

Clearly; it's oozing through the cracks of your "kind" discourse.

...it's mean spirited, and to me it indicates a reservoir of anger in people that is currently finding an outlet in going beyond plain punishment for bad behavior into sadistic derision.

Again, your discomfort seems to be not so much with the punishment as with people's enjoying it. You almost seem puritanical.

I would like to see people look into these feelings in themselves and begin to wonder where they come from, rather than blindly projecting them on others.

Great! When will you start?

That's the therapist in me.

Yeah, we've both got that in us (my MA is in Counseling). Maybe that's why we're so good at seeing the motes in each other's eyes!

[sebastacat]

One of the posters on this thread said that Efren apparently has many good qualities.

Judging by the numerous explanations he has given for his behavior, honesty, apparently, isn't one of them.

First, we were told following the San Diego incident that he was "defending the honor of women from rowdies."

Then, immediately following this latest incident, that changed, and his "handlers" changed the story to alcoholism.

And now, on this cartoon thread, the possibility of the ingestion of Ambien has been mentioned!

Good Lord, what's a Sebastacat supposed to do?

Maybe it wasn't "the rustling blinds" that tripped up Efren after all.

Perhaps it was the "shuffling of the story" that he told the responding officers that got him arrested in the first place and is the reason that he now finds himself in this unenviable situation -- from which there seems to be no easy way out.

[Barry]

... Dixon, for:




Quit Efren around!

Runners up, Alex Temple, for:

"Fifty shades of 'nay' "

And Dixon, again, for:

I see you're "stumping for wee erection"

Congrats, and thanks for all the other worthy entries!

---

As for the controversy this has stirred up: First, thank you for all your thoughtful replies. I can understand how this kind of humor might not be for everybody, but I really don't find it mean. I asked people at first to be funny rather than mean, and I think all the submissions fit that criteria. In my opinion, I think the idea of using Efren's escape as the subject of humor is what some of you find offensive rather than the actual captions.

Efren's role sets him up for both acclaim and derision. It's part of the job, which requires a thick skin. I think the very mild pokes posted here are well deserved and in good-enough taste. Sure, it's a bit edgy, but hell, this is WaccoBB .

In fact I think the winning caption, "Quit Efren around!", in addition to being quite witty, sums up the broad public's reaction quite well and Efren would do well to take it to heart. I may even send him a framed version.

Regarding compassion, I think he lots more severe pain coming his way then this bit of good natured fun (albeit at his expense). I've received my share of ridicule both publicly and privately (deserved and not) here and I consider it fair game, and if it cut's close to the bone (has some truthiness) it both stings and inspires.

Furthermore, as I'll post more about soon, I think public ridicule is part of a more appropriate consequence for his errant action than whatever punishment the legal system may dole out to him.

Regarding whether he is an alcoholic and this is just a symptom of his disease, well maybe and maybe not. I know some of you out there define most everybody who enjoys some wine on (many) occasion(s) as an alcoholic, but I don't and the Mayo Clinic doesn't either. It's quite possible to be a frequent drinker and makes some foolish moves while under the influence, and not be an alcoholic. Just because he was quickly snatched by his aides and reportedly (but not confirmed?) checked into a "rehab" doesn't make him an alcoholic either. This could easily be part of the damage control process that is no doubt in full swing. It's fairly clear that he is at least a "problem drinker" (given that he's created at least 2 problems with his drinking), in which case an intervention would be appropriate as well.

You're welcome to post either more captions, your comments about the captions or comments about the appropriateness of humor that relates to this episode on this thread, but let's keep the wider discussion about Efren and his future and the larger political implications on other threads. Thanks!

[Sara S]

No, I don't agree; it's pretty cut and dried that he tried to get into the woman's apartment while clad in his shorts. The prosecutor may have many reasons for waiting to file a charge, and he may never be charged or convicted of anything. He still tried to get into the woman's apartment.....

I agree we should not cast stones at fellow human beings. Let's give Efren the benefit of the doubt. If the police reports made it all as cut and dry as the recall-Efren-now camp assumes, why would the independent prosecutor from Napa County ask for more time to make a charging decision? According to police, no additional investigation has been requested or conducted, so it's not like the case has been continued for further investigation. If it was clear that a crime was committed, you can bet that charges would have been quickly filed.

Let's keep an open mind regarding Efren.

[Sara S]

Oh, Dixon, I'm so glad that you got into this thread, because your captions were really funny, and because you do a much better job than I could of pointing out the fallacies in these attacks on humor!

I don't think I'm doing that, though I'd be happy to consider it if you could provide a specific example. What I think I'm doing is explicating some of the implications of your statements--which you may be feeling defensive about

[arthunter]

I enjoy humor and yes, sometimes it helps to laugh when faced with difficulties, but what I find disturbing about this thread, once again, is the assumption of guilt. If Efren is deserving of this ridicule then prove it. Isn't that the basis of our democracy? I want proof ....

And if I hear a derogatory story about anyone on this forum, I will say the same thing ... prove it! ... we all deserve that consideration, don't you think?

[edie]

Actually, Edie's fly-squashing metaphor was not at all apt in this case. Squashing an innocent fly is not analogous to making jokes about a human being who has apparently made, and acted upon, a very bad moral choice which has harmed someone. Richard, it seems from this and your other comments that you're loath to endorse social consequences for bad behavior. I respectfully submit that, ultimately, more harm than good is done to society by being too "nice" when someone's behavior requires disapprobation.

I wrote... giving a helping hand... I did not write anything about to be nice or too nice or not to endorse social consequences for bad behavior.
(like as... AA is there to help not to be nice)
... and yes, more harm than good is done to society by being "nice" and or to wash bad behavior*under the table.
Also- harm can be done by turning some ones bad behavior into a gossipy monster.

[tomcat]

Wait just a minute... The POLICE said he tried to get into the woman's condo... and you believe everything the police say??? Just saying!
Tom

No, I don't agree; it's pretty cut and dried that he tried to get into the woman's apartment while clad in his shorts. The prosecutor may have many reasons for waiting to file a charge, and he may never be charged or convicted of anything. He still tried to get into the woman's apartment.....

[Barry]

Maybe the DA likes to wear all leather and chains when she's off duty. So what. Ain't nobody's business but my own.

This might be a continuation of my questionable taste these days, but I had explore what that might look like….

You have been warned! If you are also curious, click here.

[Dixon]

This might be a continuation of my questionable taste these days, but I had explore what that might look like….You have been warned! If you are also curious, click here.

I've been a very bad boy! Indict me! Indict me!

[Sara S]

No, no, of course not; the woman said that he tried to get in.

Wait just a minute... The POLICE said he tried to get into the woman's condo... and you believe everything the police say??? Just saying!
Tom

[meherc]

Have to say just one more thing, then zen. I was arrested recently for "battering a police officer" then they added two more charges later that I was never told about -2 counts of resisting arrest. They lied , they lied, they lied. Completely, they might have been the Officers Grimm.
My attorney said plead no contest and get it over with and I was going to after a year long murder trial for my son -I was falling apart, have to go bankrupt and cry all the time about losing my family. Yes, I'd rather it was all done. But then I read that Slate article about how the police make up this stuff all the time and people usually just pay the fine and forget it. Well, I decided I did not do anything wrong or anything close to what they said I did. I can't believe a jury will believe that little me went after 7 cops and scared them so. Tomcat, I would never believe the police again. And why should we believe them now?

Wait just a minute... The POLICE said he tried to get into the woman's condo... and you believe everything the police say??? Just saying!
Tom