fayfreethinkers.com

.

NUFF SAID!




from Political Intelligence:
The cartoon appears to refer to Travis, the pet chimpanzee and TV star who was shot to death by police in Stamford, Conn. on Monday after it mauled a friend of its owner.

The Rev. Al Sharpton told the Associated Press that the cartoon is "troubling at best."

Sharpton notes that Obama is the nation's first black president and that African Americans have been depicted as monkeys by racists through history.

"Being that the stimulus bill has been the first legislative victory of President Barack Obama and has become synonymous with him, it is not a reach to wonder are they inferring that a monkey wrote the last bill?" he asked, according to press accounts.

Sam Stein wrote on the Obama-friendly Huffington Post website that it seems "rife with racial and political sensitivities."

New York Post is owned by FOX News Corporation. Nuff said.

The cartoon is not unlike Obama's portrayal as a sock monkey during the campaign.



"Charles Henderson, a black Democrat running for the Utah House of Representatives, was amazed that the makers could claim ignorance to the racial undertones of their toy.

“When have you ever seen another presidential candidate depicted in such a manner? This has been around for 100-plus years, how can you not be aware of that?” he said. “It just blows me away that this would happen. Here we are in 2008 and some people still haven’t gotten it.”

Sock monkey story here.

.

DAR
Doug said the republicans were going to get real racist in their attacks against Obama. He said they were going to call him a monkey. I wanted to reserve judgment. I was doubtful. I was wrong.

D.

How the cartoon should have looked:

.

February 19, 2009, 9:47 pm
New York Post Apologizes for Chimp Cartoon

The New York Post, which was the subject of a protest outside its Midtown headquarters and continued criticism from elected officials on Thursday over the publication of an editorial cartoon that linked a chimpanzee to the economic stimulus package, has issued an apology “to those who were offended,” while maintaining that the cartoon was not intended to be racist.

The cartoon has been widely criticized as making an implicit comparison between the chimpanzee — a reference to a chimpanzee that was shot to death by a police officer in Connecticut on Monday after it attacked a friend of its owner — and President Obama, who signed the stimulus package into law on Tuesday.

On Thursday evening, The Post published on its Web site the following editorial, which a spokeswoman said would also be published in its Friday print edition:

Wednesday’s Page Six cartoon — caricaturing Monday’s police shooting of a chimpanzee in Connecticut — has created considerable controversy.

It shows two police officers standing over the chimp’s body: “They’ll have to find someone else to write the next stimulus bill,” one officer says.

It was meant to mock an ineptly written federal stimulus bill.

Period.

But it has been taken as something else — as a depiction of President Obama, as a thinly veiled expression of racism.

This most certainly was not its intent; to those who were offended by the image, we apologize.

However, there are some in the media and in public life who have had differences with The Post in the past — and they see the incident as an opportunity for payback.

To them, no apology is due.

Sometimes a cartoon is just a cartoon — even as the opportunists seek to make it something else.

Hours after the cartoon appeared on Wednesday morning, The Post received hundreds of complaints from readers and criticism from Gov. David A. Paterson, Senator Kirsten E. Gillibrand, the Rev. Al Sharpton and others.

Those complaints continued into Thursday.

Councilman Bill de Blasio, a Brooklyn Democrat, said in a statement:

We now live in a time when our nation can make real and substantive progress on race relations. However, commentary like the offensive cartoon published yesterday by The New York Post only sets us back. There is a growing pattern of certain media outlets choosing sensationalism over sensitivity and fear over facts. All of us have a responsibility to demand better from the media and ourselves.

Mr. Sharpton also held a protest outside The Post. Also issuing statements condemning the cartoon were United States Representative Gregory W. Meeks of Queens, State Senator Hiram Monserrate of Queens, State Senator Rubén Díaz Sr. of the Bronx, Councilman Charles Barron of Brooklyn, the Rev. Herbert D. Daughtry and other community leaders. Mr. Díaz said in a statement:

During Black History Month, The New York Post has depicted the first black president of the United States as a chimpanzee – to draw a twisted parallel to the chimpanzee that was recently killed. Their cartoon does nothing but promote racism against our president and encourage further racism in our society. When Fernando Ferrer ran for mayor, The New York Post ran a bigoted cartoon of Fernando Ferrer and the Rev. Al Sharpton — without much consequence. The Post’s apparent racism is still in place — as demonstrated by their ugly cartoon in yesterday’s paper — and we will not tolerate it.

from the NY Times

.

I actually believe they didn't mean it to be racist; the fault is in that no one caught it before it went to print and thought, this could be taken the wrong way.

I have said things like that and did not mean it to be racist. I've said "I would vote for a monkey for president before I'd vote for George Bush" and I've said "George Bush in office is like giving a gun to a monkey." The second one wouldn't be construed as racist, but if I said it about Obama, using a known analogy (giving a gun to a monkey) you'd accuse me of racism, even though I didn't mean it that way. So, I'm giving the Post the benefit of the doubt on this one.

.

So, I'm giving the Post the benefit of the doubt on this one.
Betsy

I'm not. See Dar's comment above.

This will not be the last Obama-As-Monkey incident.

Y'betcha.

Olbermann had Al Sharpton on Countdown last night, and he made an excellent point: The main lesson to be learned here is one of civility. Comparing Bush to a monkey was pretty much everywhere over the last 8 years, in cartoons as well as written journalisms, and noone bothered to raise concerns about those. While I agree that the NY Post cartoon was wildly offensive and should never have seen print, people that published those similar images about Bush are sitting in the proverbial glass house and are trying to throw stones.
That means that at the end of the day, disagreeing is a major and important part of the political process because it leads to discourse. But that discourse needs to be civil, regardless of which side youre on.

ChristianLoeschel wrote:That means that at the end of the day, disagreeing is a major and important part of the political process because it leads to discourse. But that discourse needs to be civil, regardless of which side youre on.

DOUG
Well, it's one thing to call a white man a monkey than to call an African-American man a monkey. To call a white man a monkey because he is allegedly stupid or oafish is to insult the man. Calling an African-American man a monkey is to buy into the stereotype that ALL African-Americans, indeed, all Blacks everywhere, are no better than apes. Calling a white man a monkey is to insult the man, but calling an African-American a monkey insults everyone of that ethnic group.

Yes, neither is civil, though. You are correct on that.

(On the other hand, maybe calling Bush a monkey insults all monkeys...)

Comparing Bush to a monkey is insulting to monkeys!! That's funny!

I agree with Christian. It's like the other day when I was arguing on facebook with a conservative who said Robert Reich is an "idiot" because he said the stimulus plan is not intended to help an employed white male construction worker. The conservative claimed Reich is "racist" and "sexist". Of course, what Reich is far from an idiot, did not mean to be racist or sexist, and what he SHOULD have said was that the money wasn't for people who have jobs but for the poor and unemployed. But he said it in a poorly constructed way. There was no convincing the other guy, though, he was going to take the statement at it's literal face value and refused to construe any meaning or context to the statement.

I don't want to be so rigid that I can't accept any other meaning to something than the one I want to see, like that guy. I also know that sometimes I say things that can be taken in a way I don't mean it.

Some of you wanted to argue that just because Hillary said she landed in sniper fire at Bosnia and ran for her life, she wasn't lying. With a little time, I could come up with several other examples where you've given a pass to other statements made or things done that look pretty bad, but you wanted to explain it away because you know the person otherwise has a good record... or whatever. So, let's give the NY Post a pass on this as just being a stupid mistake and not intentional racism.

Betsy wrote:... but you wanted to explain it away because you know the person otherwise has a good record... or whatever. So, let's give the NY Post a pass on this as just being a stupid mistake and not intentional racism.

What if the Post does not have a good record? What if it has a distinctly bad record? Would that make it harder to justify giving a pass?

I saw Sharpton on Olbermann. To elaborate a bit on his point, which Christian mentioned: Such racism should be avoided like the plague. Even if this were a situation of the cartoonist not trying to be racist, somebody at the Post needs to have the historical knowledge that portraying blacks as subhuman promotes considering them and treating them as subhuman, so that the person can come forward and say, "Uh, y'know, this probably isn't something we want to print."
I'd like to add: The fact that the Post apparently doesn't have a person with historical knowledge, a crumb of sensitivity, and the gumption to speak an objection -- while not surprising -- probably explains why their political columns are ripped to shreds by Olbermann multiple times a week.

right, like I said, stupid mistake.

and yes, if the past record shows that they commonly make racist remarks, then we should assume they meant to be racist. So I would not give the benefit of the doubt to people like Limbaugh, O'Reilly or Coulter, etc.

Is that the case with the Post?

Savonarola wrote:

Betsy wrote:... but you wanted to explain it away because you know the person otherwise has a good record... or whatever. So, let's give the NY Post a pass on this as just being a stupid mistake and not intentional racism.

What if the Post does not have a good record? What if it has a distinctly bad record? Would that make it harder to justify giving a pass?

DAR
I just wasted half an hour reading about how bad The Post is but on a very different topic (250+ posts in the comment thread). George Will wrote an article spreading blatant misinformation about global cooling claims in the 1970's. He has gotten completely busted on it (as in the past) but the Post has chosen to stand by his errors which are not remotely defensible. Pretty amazing really. See the short article here.

The NYP cartoon was in very poor taste. There is a difference between calling a white guy (Bush) a monkey and calling a black guy (Obama) a monkey. And on top of it, jokes about US presidents getting shot are always a little borderline anyway.

D.

Betsy wrote:right, like I said, stupid mistake.

and yes, if the past record shows that they commonly make racist remarks, then we should assume they meant to be racist. So I would not give the benefit of the doubt to people like Limbaugh, O'Reilly or Coulter, etc.

Is that the case with the Post?

DOUG
OK, compare this:
A co-worker sent me an e-mail that said, "The FBI stopped a plan to kidnap Obama. Here it is:" And then it showed a picture of a watermelon under a box, with the box held up by a stick that was tied by a string. So it is saying that Obama would be tempted by the watermelon, and then you could pull the string and trap him under the box.

Is this racist? Of course it is. (And it told the co-worker this in no uncertain terms.) There is a well-known stereotype about African-americans and watermelons. Using that stereotype to make a joke is racism. Well, there is a well-known stereotype of comparing African-americans to chimps and monkeys. Using that stereotype to make a joke (via a cartoon or otherwise) is racism in action. It's that simple. Even if a chimp or monkey had been in the news recently. After all, the watermelon joke would still be racist even if watermelons had recently been in the news, right?

that is a good analogy.

so, what do you think about Reich's statement? Racist and sexist?

what do you think of Hillary's comments on China that got some people riled up?

Betsy wrote: that is a good analogy.

so, what do you think about Reich's statement? Racist and sexist?

DOUG
I don't know exactly what he said, but the paraphrase above said that he said that "the stimulus plan is not intended to help an employed white male construction worker." I can't imagine how that could be racist or sexist, but I don't know the context.

Betsy wrote: what do you think of Hillary's comments on China that got some people riled up?

I heard that Hillary said that talk of human rights "can't interfere with the global economic crisis, the global climate change crisis and the security crises," and that on human rights issues it "might be better to agree to disagree" with China. Well, I think she is just saying that we MUST get some things done with regard to agreements with China on the global economic crisis, the global climate change crisis, and the security crises, and that we can't have a litmus test of human rights be the deal breaker with China. She is not saying that human rights are not important.

Given that China has us by the economic balls, since we keep borrowing money from them, we must face reality that we can't bargain from as much a position of strength as we used to (thanks, GW!).

Hillary is carrying out the negotiating plan set by Obama. Make no mistake about that. She is not out there just being Hillary Clinton and doing whatever she wants. Obama wants to make progress with China, and we can't do the George W. Bush thing and set enormous preconditions for talks to take place such that they never take place. We can't afford that. That's the sort of thinking that made us so impotent yet villified on the world stage during the W years.

DAR
The owner of The Post apologizes for the cartoon:

***
The chairman of the New York Post, Rupert Murdoch, personally apologized Tuesday for an editorial cartoon published by the newspaper that drew charges of racism.

"Today I want to personally apologize to any reader who felt offended, and even insulted," said the statement from Murdoch, who is also chairman and chief executive of News Corporation, which owns the paper.

"I can assure you -- without a doubt -- that the only intent of that cartoon was to mock a badly written piece of legislation.

"It was not meant to be racist, but unfortunately, it was interpreted by many as such. We all hold the readers of the New York Post in high regard, and I promise you that we will seek to be more attuned to the sensitivities of our community." --CNN

Now THIS is unquestionably intentionally racist.



The mayor of Los Alamitos is coming under fire for an e-mail he sent out that depicts the White House lawn planted with watermelons, under the title "No Easter egg hunt this year."

huffington post

.

The chairman of the New York Post, Rupert Murdoch, personally apologized Tuesday for an editorial cartoon published by the newspaper that drew charges of racism.

Thus far we've had the sock-monkey as Obama.
Next came Limbaugh's "Magic Negro" references to Obama allegedly by a black comedian.
Then the monkey-eats-banana T-shirt for Obama.

Now comes this New York Post's dead ape cartoon which Al Sharpton says suggests an assassination.

This apology should deter additional monkey-likeness insults for about six months. Large parts of U.S.A. are racist and not just the slave states who unanimously supported McCain-Palin, save for So.Carolina.

.