I first saw the NY Post cartoon with no knowledge of the back story

[Jackpine Radical]

about the crazed chimp. I was instantly appalled and sickened, and had absolutely no doubt that this was a vicious, racist attack on Obama and, far worse, a legitimization and even a condoning of the idea of an assassination.

Since then, I have had trouble understanding how anyone could see it as anything but that. It's really so blatant that, to my way of thinking, the backstory does nothing more than provide a bit of camouflage for a truly nasty bit of filth.

[Chorophyll]

1. Completely agree with you.

But make sure you're geared up for some really long and pointless arguments. Particularly: "Obama didn't write the stimulus plan; therefore the cartoon is not racist." :eyes:

Forewarned is forearmed.

[Wickerman]

2. It really is appalling, regardless of backstory

And that an editor allowed it go forward is unforgivable. The editor should be fired. The cartoonist is crap and shouldn't be working in the first place, never seen anything funny at all from him.

[SharonAnn]

11. Even if it weren't racism it promotes killing someone you disagree with.

The message that the way to stop something you don't want is to kill the "other" is appalling.

That's the mentality that brought the shooter into the Unitarian Church here in Knoxville, to shoot the members. He just "hated liberals".

This idea shouldn't get any reinforcement anywhere in our society.

It's not humor, it's not irony, it's not a cartoon, and it's not funny!

[NancyG]

3. Same with me. I couldn't believe it. nt

[YOY]

4. It's racist I am sure.

The question I am trying to figure out is: Was the racism "accidental" or purposeful?

[Jackpine Radical]

5. You're kidding. You're willing to grant that much doubt?

Unless you're using "accidental" (with quotes) as a synonym for purposeful, in which case your point eludes me.

[YOY]

6. Totally as synonym for purposeful but trying to cover it up with stupidity/"naivete".

It's racist...but the guy is pretty much a one trick pony. He takes a current event and compares it the stimulus: A-Rod, Octomom, etc... He could have spun it differently but chose the chimp to be "the writer" of the stimulus...therefore making it racist.

[October]

7. Well-stated

I think you hit the nail on the head by describing the "chimp" story as camouflage.

Personally, I couldn't get past the idea that these "cops" were murdering the author of the stimulus package. How exactly is that clever or amusing? And, for the life of me, I couldn't figure out what it had to do with the "chimp incident." The piece just fails.

[RobinA]

15. That Was My Reaction

I saw the cartoon knowing the back story and my first reaction was, What does the (real life) chimp have to do with the (real life) stimulus bill? Then it was, The chimp stands for Obama? But what does shooting the Chimp/Obama/bill writer have to do with Obama, because Obama wasn't shot? I couldn't add the whole thing up at all, racist or not. It finally dawned on me that the artist was trying to make the point that the bill was bad. It's a lousy cartoon even without the racism element, because it depends on the meme that the stimulus bill is bad, which most people do not subscribe to. The cartoon shows on that level, as well as on the level where someone thought there was any way in hell the cartoon would NOT come across as racist, how clueless, absolutely without basic understanding, the right-wing has become that they thought this vile piece would fly. Stunning. Even for them.

[Smith_3]

8. I must admit, I had read about the chimp attack earlier and it took me a while to "get it".

I wasn't aware of that whole monkey - black person thing. Now I doubt that a political cartoonist wouldn't be aware of that though.

[seabeyond]

9. i agree. racist and imply killing pres by our very own police. what is media doing with it.

i dont watch tv news.

[MineralMan]

10. The New York Post editorial staff saw that cartoon

and deliberately decided to run it, despite the obvious racial and anti-Obama message it sent. There was no mistake about it. It is, apparently, NYP policy to denigrate black people, and especially our President.

We have no laws against such excesses by the press. We have only our right to refuse to purchase or read that newspaper. We also have the right to protest its ugliness in whatever way we wish.

But, there is no mistake. The slur against both blacks and Obama was intentional on the part of the cartoonist and the editorial staff of that newspaper. Nothing they say will change that.

Let's work to close down the New York Post, through every means we can muster. Go after the advertisers. Blog the issue. Denounce any apologies the paper may try to make. We, along with all other sensible people, can run this paper out of business.

[seemslikeadream]

12. especially since they put Obama's photo signing it into law on the opposite page

[MineralMan]

14. Exactly. It was a clear and open decision to

publish the cartoon. For their racism, they deserve to be shunned by all reasonable people.

[Chorophyll]

18. I didn't know that. Holy crap. nt

[burythehatchet]

13. There should be no doubt; the cartoonist's prior work is sufficient evidence of his

blatant racism.

[treestar]

16. With the history of racism in this country and comparing blacks to apes, etc.

It is quite blatantly obvious. It amazes me anyone tries to defend it! Freepers maybe, but I've seen it on DU!

[calico1]

17. I agree with you.

My feeling is they took the opportunity of the chimp story to publish a cartoon which was meant to be racist. Then they can attempt to cover their butts saying it's comparing the stimulus to the chimp.

Anyone who knows anything about history should know damn well that not too long ago in our history Blacks were frequently depicted as apes and monkeys.

So I don't buy for a minute that this was some accidental coincidence.

Especially not from a rag like the Post.