I don’t agree with the examples you’ve used regarding blackface.

A governer holds a lot of power and should set the highest possible standards for others — the fact that Northam wore blackface in the past makes me seriously question his ethics and decision making capabilities. There are plenty of people that have never worn blackface and do not have a questionable past, let those people replace Northam.

Let’s be honest — people who use blackface now or in the past 50 years know exactly what they are doing — blackface has not been acceptable for 50 years at least. You can argue that the times have changed all you want, but not to the extent you are arguing on this particular topic of blackface. Also, just because blackface was not punished so much in the past does not lessen it’s impact now or in the past.

Comedians using blackface to mock high-profile black people is not so problematic - in each example you’ve used, the black person being mocked was a very high-status person — in other words, the comedians were ‘punching up, not ‘punching down’ — I feel that this distinction is important. If the comedians were wearing blackface and mocking the ‘average’ black person or resorting to stereotyopes, this would be ‘punching down’ and so much more serious. The use of blackface by these comedians is a little problematic — why could they not find a black comedian to do the skits? But worthy of firing? No, I don’t believe so.

The examples you’ve used show that we are doing a good job deciding what is acceptable and what is not, so your concerns are unfounded.