Had the Hate Speech Cartoon Been in a Liberal Publication Towards a Repuke President...

[tekisui]

Had a liberal publication printed a similar cartoon with b*sh as the subject, dead on the ground with two holes in his chest....

The repukes and the right would have made it an issue to end all issues. Remember General Betray-us? They would have taken it an ran with it. They would have framed it and dominated the news cycles until a Democratic-led Congress passed and 'Sense of the House' and a 'Sense of the Senate' denouncing the cartoon and the publication.

The outrage and anger is justified and should be harnessed to force the repukes to comment on it, one way or the other. Use it to force them to denounce it on the floor of the Congress. If they choose to support the racist cartoon, then bury them.

Opportunities like this open the party's coffin door. It exposes them for what they are, and it is up to us to kick them in. We can further isolate them. We can make them more irrelevant. They are down, we need to make them out.

We have to jump on these opportunities to bring their hate to the attention of America. Everyday, they as a party are trying to come back, and everyday we must work to prevent it.

[Kittycat]

1. Also being overlooked here...

Is that the cartoon wasn't done in humor. The monkey was shot dead. It was violent and horrible.

[monmouth]

3. As Whoopi recently stated..."If you're going to attempt humor, learn how to do it."...n/t

[JayMusgrove]

5. Whoopi, the Princess of good humor........no way around it

Would LOVE to see Whoopi and Obama on SNL........they could do a great routine.

[muntrv]

2. RNC chairman Steele should be called out on this one.

[tekisui]

6. He is who the pressure should be applied to.

[Cha]

8. If history repeats itself then

he would say it's nothing. Yes, the pressure should be on Michael Steele.

[MadMaddie]

10. He will only say like the good house boy he is

that it wasn't offensive. What? It's true.

[JayMusgrove]

4. Cannot agree with you more, but evidently, some people here.....

think it's WONDERFUL to make fun of a black President as if he were a monkey, and don't see how some of us are offended.

I suggest they all resign from the Democratic Party, unless they can explain, in plain English, what the heck they are laughing about.

[nc4bo]

7. Who's LOL? I'm seeing many things but getting off on this toon ain't one of 'em. nt

[namahage]

9. Perhaps not everyone is taking the same amount of offense as you.

Some might be willing to give the cartoonist the benefit of the doubt that there was no racially-motivated intent.

I, personally, see this as AT BEST recklessness--it's a pretty big stretch to assume that NOT ONE person in the chain from cartoonist to publication could have foreseen a potential problem of putting a monkey and the stimulus bill in the same cartoon, considering that similar outrage erupted when the Obama monkey dolls came out--leaving aside an equally disturbing image of a public servant being shot.

Recklessness, or even negligence, is at best an explanation--NOT a justification, and even in the unlikely case that no harm was meant, harm was definitely caused, and all responsible need to be held accountable.

And I'm pretty sure that NOT ONE of us has posted anything to the effect that Obama being compared to a monkey is OK, let alone "wonderful."

But if you think so, why not click Alert on the offenders?

[Jim Lane]

11. I disagree -- I don't see this as a huge opportunity for political gain

You'll note that there's a significant minority of us even here on DU who don't see the cartoon as viciously racist, calling for the assassination of Obama, etc., etc.

In our view, the cartoonist took the recent police shooting of a chimpanzee and used that as a basis for joking that the bill was so foolish it must've been written by giving the task to a chimp. If the President supporting the bill were white, no one would've given the cartoon much thought. The cartoonist was either insensitive to the racist interpretation some readers might give it, or, less charitably, was deliberately packing in two meanings -- none of us can say for sure.

Apparently, however, no one can say anything like what I said in the previous paragraph without being flamed. Please insert flames here: _____________ .

Now, if everyone is through denouncing me, we'll return to the OP's point. The OP proposed that this issue be seized upon as a major focus of attacks on the Republicans. Given the undeniable fact that even a substantial percentage of DUers don't see this as such a big deal, do you really think such attacks will resonate heavily with the swing voters? I mean, there's not much to be gained in further firing up those of us who worked hard to elect Obama and other Democrats.

As a practical matter, we do better to highlight Republican obstructionism in the face of a real economic crisis. We also do better to highlight Culture-of-Corruption issues. Governor Eliot Spitzer (Democrat) committed adultery with prostitutes, and resigned; Senator David Vitter (Republican) committed adultery with prostitutes but remains in office, and even apparently plans to run for re-election. By comparison, the average middle-of-the-road voter will be turned off by our making a big deal over what's "just" a cartoon. Now, before we need a call a second obligatory flame break, let me point out the quotation marks. They're there to suggest that the dismissal of this ruckus as "just" a cartoon is the view I'm attributing to many of the voters we want to reach.

Discussing it on DU is one thing, but time spent pushing this issue before a larger audience would be largely wasted.