I'd like to offer a couple analogies to prove the innocence of the chimp cartoon:

[BuyingThyme]

1. First, let's say that they run a cartoon which shows Lance Armstrong, all in a huff because somebody had just stolen his bike. (That actually occurred recently, as did the shooting of a chimp.) And let's say that this cartoon also shows two cops on the scene, responding to Armstrong's bike-theft complaint. And let's say that the caption above the two cops in this this let's-say cartoon reads, "They'll have to find someone else to write the next stimulus bill."

Now, everybody would know that such a cartoon would be intended to make a statement not about the President, but about Congress. And, obviously, the use of Lance Armstrong as a prop to make this point is understandable, as this was a recent news event. There would be no outrageous claims about racism or any other such nonsense. And the cartoon would be hilarious.

2. Second, let's say that they run a cartoon which shows not a chimp, but a bear, lying dead on the street as if he had just been shot by a couple cops after mauling a child at some kind of pet-the-bear event in Montana. (I don't know if this has happened recently; let's just pretend.) And let's say that the caption above the same two cops in this let's-say cartoon reads, "They'll have to find someone else to write the next stimulus bill."

In this case, everybody would similarly know that such a cartoon would be intended to make a statement not about the President, but about Congress. And as above, as a would-be recent topic of discussion in news-media circles, a child-mauling bear would certainly be conducive to furthering discussions about economic stimulus and the like. Like peanut butter and jelly. Again, the cartoon would be absolutely hilarious and, again, there would be no mention of racism or any other such nonsense.

I don't know why it's so different when it comes to the New York Post's chimpanzee cartoon.

:shrug:

[atreides1]

1. Can you read minds?

Because unless you can, you don't know what the intent of the cartoonist was, no one does!!!

Why are so many people trying to justify this cartoon?

[slackmaster]

3. Inability to read the cartoonist's mind cuts both ways

:shrug:

[Uzybone]

8. I guess there is a deep racist/prejudiced streak on this site

It takes issues like this to bring them out. This is very weird. Its like as if this cartoonist is a liberal stalwart or something. He routinely posts offensive cartoons. Why are so many out to cover for him?

[AndrewP]

45. It's creepy, isn't it?

Seriously, anyone that doesn't get why this is viewed as a racist cartoon, research a little fucking history.

Books aren't a bad thing. I know it requires not having American Idol playing for 30 seconds, but you'll be all right.

[KittyWampus]

49. Racist images reside in ALL our minds. They are the bastard children we all have custody of.

When *I* saw that cartoon I saw the "infinite number of monkeys typing stimulus bill" and figured the cartoonist tapped into that cause of the rampant chimp that got shot dead the day before. Didn't occur to me it would be alluding to Obama's person. But then I am not a racist and my imagination seems to cover broader and more diverse territory than many other DU'ers posting about this.

Searching the cartoonist's archives, one finds he's a hack who uses a forumula over and over again. Like "just add water and mix". He takes an irrelevant sensational story and uses it to frame a relevant political story.

The idiot just happened to step on a third rail with the chimp story. He's proven to be comfortable using offensive images and stories in the past.

I'm not "covering" the hack cartoonist. But I'm not certain he CONSCIOUSLY INTENDED for it to be racist. Furthermore, at this point I don't care.

Whether he intended for it to be Obama/racist or not, people plugged an old ugly stereotype into that cartoon. For many people at that point, it becomes necessary to attack the image and whoever forced them to consider it no matter what. Cause we can't stand the fact those images belong to us and are a part of our collective heritage.

When confronted with racist images, I don't freak out or obsess over them. I recognize them for what they are and move on.

No matter how hard you try, you can never rip racist images out of our collective culture. They are a part of us.

[Enthusiast]

66. Don't dismiss the very real

possibility that many long time members of the DU are actually stealth Republicans that have a clear agenda. That agenda is to divide and confuse us.

[Fire1]

93. They DO pop up every now and then don't they? But, then again,

I'm the 'internet police.'

[BuyingThyme]

10. I know what the intent was.

It was to take a racist swipe at Barack Obama and rally the hate of the kind of morons who read the New York Post.

Nothing else makes sense. Just like nothing in my OP makes sense. No matter how hard you try, no matter what kind of ridiculous analogies you make -- from Lance Armstrong to bears -- nothing but racism explains that cartoon.

[Numba6]

58. It's not that I'm the greatest writer, but I don't understand your OP at all as anything other

than justifying racism.

If that's a mistake, OK, but what the hell else was your point?

[Bluebear]

68. stirring the pot

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

20. The ability to interpret a cartoonist's intent is called literacy.

Plus, it's not like the cartoonist hasn't published plenty of bigoted cartoons before.

[Bicoastal]

37. Any political cartoonist who is incapable of crafting a cartoon with ONE possible interpretation...

...is a hack who needs no sympathy.

This isn't high art, folks. Political cartoons are meant to express their writer's opinion, cleverly, concisely, and CLEARLY. If most people are misinterpreting your political cartoon, the fault is yours, not the public's.

So even if the guy truly isn't a bigot (and happen to think he IS), he's an incompetent fool who should be fired. A bullet-ridden chimp who maimed someone so badly she needs a face transplant NEVER should have been made the topic of a political cartoon, much less one involving the President, much MUCH less one involving an African-American President.

[slackmaster]

2. If it was a bear I'd see it as an attack on my state and a reference to its budget problems

[BuyingThyme]

14. Ridiculous. Another liberal looking for attention.

[slackmaster]

46. If enough Californians are offended by it, then it's inherently offensive

:nuke:

[DevonRex]

4. Perhaps you're being sarcastic here.

[BuyingThyme]

15. What?

[DevonRex]

19. Deleted because I read one of your other posts in this thread.

[BuyingThyme]

25. That's not what I'm doing.

[DevonRex]

26. Yes. I saw that so I deleted my post. :)

[BuyingThyme]

28. Hey, no fair.

[DevonRex]

31. Hee hee.

[Puzzler]

5. As someone involved in the publishing industry...

... I can tell you that even if (and I really mean if) they did not intend the cartoon to be racist, at the very least, the cartoonist and the editors still showed incredibly bad judgment. Why? Because it would hardly have taken rocket science to realize that there was a good chance that many people could have taken offence to the cartoon... irrespective of what they really intended.

[BuyingThyme]

17. How could they have not intended the cartoon to be racist?

What is it that ties a dead chimp to the stimulus package if not racism? It's not like there's an inherent overlap, as is the case with Lance Armstrong and stimulus packages.

[Puzzler]

47. I said "if"...

... and I personally think that the cartoonist and editors knew full well what they were doing. I'm simply pointing out that even if you go out on a limb and accept their shabby (and unbelievable) defense, then they are still guilty of incredibly poor, poor judgment.

[BuyingThyme]

52. You're probably right.

[kirby]

6. Seriously?

You really don't see the difference?

In the Chimp cartoon case, there has been a long history in this country of using Chimps/Monkeys/Apes to denigrate blacks. The other two examples do not have the same connection.

Have you look at some of the other cartoons by the same artist? The themes give you an idea of the artists intentions. Several are anti-gay cartoons, one has the terrorists cheering that Obama won the primary, etc.

[BuyingThyme]

12. You don't think that Lance Armstrong cartoon would be hilarious?

[kirby]

32. No...

Why would that be funny? How would a missing bicycle or even Lance Armstrong write a stimulus bill? That makes very little sense. Oh, but maybe it would be funnier if we found out a hooded black man was the one who stole the bicycle. Now thats a laugh riot knee slapper! NOT!

[BuyingThyme]

38. What if a white football player had recently been shot dead by police.

Certainly that would make sense in the context of a stimulus package. But it probably wouldn't be so funny.

[Barack_America]

7. Why are you trying to defend the indefensible?

1. There is a woman currently in critical condition and, from all accounts, lacking a face due to that chimpanzee. Running a cartoon making light of that incident, while the woman is fighting for her life, is tasteless and NOT FUNNY.

2. Only people who were home-schooled under a rock *might* not know that African Americans were, during dark days of our nation's history, openly referred to as "monkeys", "chimps", what-have-you. Running a cartoon that uses a chimpanzee to embody Washington politics when we've just inaugurated our first African American President is tasteless and NOT FUNNY.

3. Encouraging or even suggesting violence against elected leaders, which the cartoon most certainly does, goes beyond being just tasteless and not funny.


These points aren't even up for discussion, IMO.

[BuyingThyme]

18. You're correct.

[kirby]

34. Watch this...

http://www.metacafe.com/watch/1974564/chewbacca_defense/

[BuyingThyme]

35. I can't watch from here.

What does it show?

[kirby]

36. See

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chewbacca_defense

[BuyingThyme]

40. Oh, I know all about the Chewbacca defense.

That's the one with Richard Armitage and Bob Woodward.

[Zodiak]

9. The cartoon doesn't feature Lance Armstrong or a bear

so I fail to see why your scenarios are analogous.

An analogous situation would be "what if Barney Frank was the front-and-center proponent of the stimulus bill and the picture portrayed a dead fairy shot by the cops, and the cops said "we'll just have to find another fairy to write the bill?".

You cannot draw analogies by removing all of the racist elements from the cartoon and asking us to judge it that way. The cartoon had clear racist elements in it and we should deal with it and not the white-washed version of it conjured out of thin air for rhetorical sakes.

This thread "proves" nothing but the insistence on dealing with the situation according to the OP's dictates, and not as it really is.

[BuyingThyme]

21. What does Barney Frank have to do with chimpanzees?

[Zodiak]

30. about as much as Lance Armstrong does

get it?

But he is gay, and so I used a gay stereotype in my rhetorical cartoon. That is truly analogous.

Your examples whitewash all of the racism away and then you call it analogous. I call it bullshit.

....or are you trying to be obtuse in your defense of this racist POS cartoon?

[BuyingThyme]

33. So you're saying that the only analogy that would make sense is one

in which there were actually some kind of reasoning behind the selection of the shooting victim outside of the random occurrence of news events? Some kind of agenda or attempt to communicate something?

ON EDIT: Removed extraneous words.

[Zodiak]

39. No, the only good analogy would also use racism

...or some other form of bigotry.

Because that is what is at issue with this cartoon.

If you refuse to see that this cartoon has racist overtones, then you are deliberately being that way. The context has been posted now numerous times on this site. Look around, dozens and dozens of old cartoons that show black people as apes...a long-time American tradition that every political cartoonist would know. This didn't fucking happen in a vacuum.

But hey, if you wanna get your daily attention being obtuse and avoiding the direct points given to you, go for it, but you have wasted enough of my time. I know for a fact that you are smarter than you are letting on in this thread, and frankly, that pisses me off ten times as much.

[BuyingThyme]

42. Yeah, you might be right.

[IGotAName]

64. Good analysis- I failed to see the point being made here either. nt

[Bicoastal]

11. As I have said many, many, MANY times...

...this cartoon was a terrible idea in theory and was poorly done in execution.

It's a lousy cartoon no matter how you look at it, because at the end of the day, you still have a monkey's body, ostensibly the president's, riddled with bullets. The cartoonist failed because everyone KNOWS who is responsible for the stimulus bill; if it was some anonymous thing, like "I guess they'll have to find someone else to market New Coke," it MIGHT have worked. But still, in ANY case, this isn't a live, goofy looking chimp; instead, you've got the gory sight of an animal's body lying there in a pool of blood...

This cartoonist may or may not be a bona fide racist, but he's indisputably a hack.

[BuyingThyme]

13. What's so terrible about demonstrating the organic ties between

dead chimps and DC stimulus bills?

[Bicoastal]

27. Well for one thing, the chimp in question nearly DESTROYED his victim.

This is what Travis the Chimp did to the friend of his owner:

"Injuries to Nash were described as "horrendous" by the emergency crew. Within the following 72 hours, she underwent more than seven hours of surgery on her face and hands by four teams of surgeons; because of the nature of the injuries, the hospital provided counseling to its staff members who initially treated her. Paramedics noted she lost her nose, eyes and jaw in the attack."

And then, of course, everyone LOVES seeing caricatures of bleeding, bullet-riddled bodies of dead animals in the Editorial section. ESPECIALLY animal bodies.

So at some point, this cartoonist apparently went, "Hey, you know what this light-hearted tale reminds me of? You know what I can tie this cheery tabloid story to? Why, to my displeasure of the STIMULUS PACKAGE, of course!"

Bad idea, dude. Baaaaaad idea.

[BuyingThyme]

29. Oh.

[rateyes]

16. ...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=5097677&mesg_id=5097677

[DevonRex]

22. +1. :)

[BuyingThyme]

23. Well said.

[Bluebear]

55. +2

[butterfly77]

24. Here's my analogy...

A few weeks back there was a shooting I believe in LA and the cops held down a young man while one cop shot him and killed him. There have been protests for weeks now about how the people have been treated in that area by the police.

So,the toon symbolizes to me that,cops can kill who they want and get away with it but,...

It also is trying to say that the chimp is Obama...

[CatWoman]

41. Question:

just what the fuck are you talking about??

[BuyingThyme]

43. I'm just putting it all into perspective.

[Bluebear]

44. It's all innocent, where's your perspective?

[CatWoman]

102. I think

he's unce, tice, fee times a mady :hi:

[polmaven]

48. Lance Armstrong's bike

has been used as a demeaning and derogatory reference to African Americans? WOW! Who knew? :shrug:!

[BuyingThyme]

50. That doesn't make any sense.

[polmaven]

54. Well,

neither do you analogies.

Chimps HAVE - forever - been used derogatorilly against African Americans. The cartoonist HAD to know that.

[uppityperson]

51. Poor analogies....

1) What the police say would not make sense. What does Lance's bike being stolen have to do with a stimulus bill? What would it have to do with Congress?

2) It wasn't a bear but a chimp. Bears do not have the same negative racial/continent/skin color connotation that chimps do.

Aside from the cartoon not making sense and being racially offensive, I really don't see what the problem is either.

[BuyingThyme]

53. All good points.

[Numba6]

56. Racism is as American as apple pie, even from some so-called "progressives"

Really, a waste of baudwidth to argue with racists

This thread is a disgraceful racist justification

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=8213555&mesg_id=8214125

[BuyingThyme]

59. You didn't even read the thread.

[Numba6]

60. I don't know if you're one of the owners of this site but you are being offensive in your willful

ignorance

[BuyingThyme]

61. It's ignorant to comment on a thread without first reading it.

[Numba6]

62. I've read your racist justifying thread & I still won't join the KKK

[BuyingThyme]

78. You still haven't read it.

What if you were to read it?

[EffieBlack]

91. You really should read it . . .

I'm glad I did before commenting

[WinkyDink]

57. It's the NY Post.

[handmade34]

63. No- it would not be hilarious!

it seems you have no understanding of what an editorial cartoon is supposed to be and do... The cartoon in the Post was bad and totally irrelevant

[BuyingThyme]

73. Yeah, as irrelevant as Lance Armstrong or a bear, right?

[tekisui]

65. Try as you might to defend a blatantly racist cartoon.

You fail.

[BuyingThyme]

74. Well, I tried.

[MadMaddie]

67. Let's try this on for size

http://www.aish.com/holocaust/overview/The_War_Against_the_Jews.asp

Let's see if we can guess what the cartoonist intent was in the Anti-Jewish propaganda cartoon.

You see many of you are making the same mistakes that many made in Germany, they thought what the heck it's only a cartoon. By saying nothing and not expressing outrage they allowed the Nazi machine to come into power by inaction. I don't understand why many do not understand that history repeats itself again and again....and the lesson is do not take lightly, hate rhetoric spewed on the radio, tv or cartoons or in the streets. Because that rhetoric if not checked and opposed grows into a full blown attrocity.

Maybe it's no big deal to some who have not been the target of these (**wink, wink funny cartoons) but those who have know racism when they see it.

Now to address your analogies.
1. Doesn't work because Lance Armstrong is not black. So you are right there would be no outrageous claims of racism. Whites have not been the target of these type of hate cartoons in America.

2. The Bear doesn't work - Monkeys not bears were used in the early 1900's through current times to depict freed slaves and blacks in America. Depicting blacks as less than human, unclean etc.

What I am sad to see is that many either don't want to or don't get that America's history is steeped in racism from slavery, to lynchings, to the church bombings, to (racist cartoons) and this history is very real to black Americans and other minorities.

Many of you have recently in the last 8 years experienced being called Anti-American, un-patriotic because you did not support the * regime. You were surprised by it.

Well minorities in this country are not surprised by the cartoon we were expecting it. And hell yes we are offended.

[BuyingThyme]

75. You're very good with analogies.

Thanks for all the help.

[MadMaddie]

94. Anytime!

We just have to keep pointing to history to understand paths that may evolve if we are not vigilant. Many want to ignore history because they see no relevance.....kinda sad.

[Honeycombe8]

69. Because EVERYONE knows that black people have been denigrated as "monkeys" for eons!

Are you TOTALLY ignorant of our country's history? There is a particular significance to using the image of a chimp associated with any Af. American.

The images of chimps have been used for many years by bigots to make fun of Af. Americans. To use an image of a chimp to even indirectly refer to an Af. American (no less our President)was either: definitely intended; or was done by someone so ignorant and stupid that s/he should not be allowed to do cartoons anymore. Whether it was intended or not, the effect was the same.

I'm not one to call for people being fired willy nilly. I wasn't even in favor of Don Imus being fired after his comments. But I think this calls for termination, and quickly.

[BuyingThyme]

76. I don't think racists should be fired from racist newspapers.

[olegramps]

70. If it wasn't intentionally racist, then is was damn stupid at best.

[uponit7771]

71. Facts: 1.) Obama authored a version of the stimulus bill, 2.) Blacks have been potrayed as monkeys,

...3.) the cartoon showed a form of monkey getting shot

It can't get any simpler than that, the fact that the person didn't know it was racist in and of itself is racist

[Milo_Bloom]

72. Because it wouldn't lead to Fauxrage!!!

Very few, if any, REALLY thought the cartoon was racist. Oh yeah, people will claim they did on this site and others, but, please... you gotta be pretty silly to believe that was the intent behind the cartoon.

However, people saw a political opportunity and seized on it. "A GOP paper is making the stimulus bill a racial issue". "The GOP is playing dirty", etc.

Unfortunately, when it comes to something as serious and real as racism, they are better off to skip the fauxrage and instead wait for something real to attack.

They would have gained far more ground shaking their head over this cartoon, pointing out the way some people may be interpreting it and saying, "I know the cartoonist and paper couldn't have INTENDED people to interpret it this way, but how stupid do they have to be to not realize some people might."

In that type of statement, you rise about the stupidity of screaming racism where it is ambiguous at best and you diminish the paper by making them look foolish.

[BuyingThyme]

77. I think it's good the way people are exposing the Post for what it is.

[backscatter712]

79. The racist apologists are still at it, I see...

:eyes:

[newview88]

80. Is it really that difficult to accept the fact

that black people have been referred to negatively as chimps for decades now and the wound is still very very raw. As a black person, the moment I saw the cartoon I was highly offended. Posts asking what the big deal is are also getting quite offensive.

[Numba6]

83. YES, THE OP IS IGNORANT ABOUT 300 YEARS OF AMERICAN RACISM

and revels in their ignorance, it seems

[Numba6]

81. THESE OBNOXIOUS THREADS JUSTIFYING RACISM ARE OFFENSIVE

Really, this is just troll behavior -- the OP cannot see reality

[incapsulated]

82. It was meant as satire

Kinda missed the mark and this isn't a humor loving crowd.

[incapsulated]

84. Then again, Thyme seems to be amsuing themselves with it, so....

Someone is having a laugh. :P

[BuyingThyme]

87. :P

:P

[Numba6]

85. YEAH, WE KNOW SATIRE is so kewl, especially when it's done BADLY

poorly written, poorly thought out, and badly presented

[incapsulated]

86. Actually I found that very funny

But I'm not as humor impaired as so many here.

I do admit the satire in this post was far too subtle to be discerned, however, lol.

[BuyingThyme]

88. Quite a compliment.

[quakerboy]

89. You are wrong

Your example #1 and has no relevance to the issue. It would be an inane cartoon with no point. Your assertion that it would point to congress makes no sense, as it would point nothing at no one, being totally nonsensical

As to your example number 2: Closer, but still no cigar. This was the presidents stimulus bill, and everyone would know that the cartoonist was comparing President Obama to a berzerk Bear. Which is still a bit out of line in my opinion, but does not have quite the same connotation as comparing him to a berzerk Chimp.

But thats not what happened. The cartoonist chose to equate President Obama with a primate. And then show add the element of it being a shot dead Primate. Did he fully think this out? Perhaps not. But he still wrote what he wrote.

[BuyingThyme]

95. Yeah, that sounds reasonable.

[quakerboy]

101. Hmm.

Apparently I missed the point. I usually start getting suspicious when thing seem so easy to debunk. Apparently hours of research into the finer details of the current real estate situation have softened my brain.

[petronius]

90. Even a chimp (pan troglodytes) could come up with better analogies than these (nt)

[BuyingThyme]

97. I doubt it.

[WeDidIt]

92. Bullshit

1) Comparing apples to racist images.

2) Comparing apples to racist images.

You, sir, are full of bullshit.

[BuyingThyme]

98. How can you dismiss the inherent link between a heartbroken Lance Armstrong and a dead chimpanzee?

[incapsulated]

100. lol n/t

[Name removed]

96. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[BuyingThyme]

99. Hmm...

Welcome to DU, Wacobear0710!

:hi: