Is This Cartoon Racist?

@Setanta,

Seems fair, since I don't tend to buy into your bullshit.

0 Replies

You don't have to. Honest people can see the racist undertone of that cartoon whether or not you remain dishonest.

2 Replies

@Setanta,

So now, if I don't see the racist undertone I'm dishonest?

Hm...doesn't seem right.

2 Replies

@Setanta,

Setanta wrote:

You don't have to. Honest people can see the racist undertone of that cartoon whether or not you remain dishonest.

And intelligent people can see you are a beady-eyed, supercilious buffoon.

1 Reply

@Robert Gentel,

Robert Gentel wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:
Linkat is correct; the artist knew what he was doing when he made the cartoon.

For you bunch to pretend that he didn't is farcical; it implies an almost complete ignorance of the history of racial p0litics in America.

I bet the cartoonist was counting on people getting their panties in a wad over it for the free publicity.

I bet you are exactly correct, sir.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

@maporsche,

maporsche wrote:

So now, if I don't see the racist undertone I'm dishonest?

Hm...doesn't seem right.

I don't think you are being honest about this issue; instead, I think you are playing Devil's Advocate.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

I do play DA a lot, but this time I do actually believe that the calls of racist are entirely unsupported.

I do think that given the crazy-ass chimp news coupled with the crazy-ass stimulus bill pretty much being covered 24 hours a day on the news last week, I think this cartoon can be taken at face value. Not every politcial cartoon has a hidden meaning.

As far as I know, the cartoon artist isn't a KKK clansman, so any "undertone" that people think is there is at the very least, completely unsupported.

Why inject racism into something when there is plenty of racism that actually is supported to exert energy against (start with incarceration rates among blacks vs white for the same crime).

2 Replies

@Ticomaya,

Of course, you've never seen me, so you aren't in a position to say. I did see the image you posted of yourself early one morning, before you reverted to the goofy avatar you use now--there couldn't be a greater contrast. One wonders if you wish you didn't look as you do, and would prefer to look like the clown whose picture you use.

As for your descent in to deeper name calling, that doesn't surprise me, since you don't seem interested in discussing your dishonesty.

1 Reply

@maporsche,

I didn't say that . . . but if you want to whine about it, help yourself, you seem to do whining very well.

0 Replies

@Foxfyre,

I agree he may have used this in regard to anyone in the White House - I just think that the added feature of a black President was a bonus for him and he had an out - it wasn't the President - as others have described. Although I am fairly confident he realized that this could be inferred as the President w/a racial twist giving the cartoon more controversy rather than just being poor taste about a poor woman being seriously injured.

1 Reply

@maporsche,

maporsche wrote:

As far as I know, the cartoon artist isn't a KKK clansman, so any "undertone" that people think is there is at the very least, completely unsupported.

http://starcasm.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/new_york_post_monkey_cartoon600.jpg

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

And this cartoonist is experienced in political and racial satire. For him not to know this could be construed as racial is ludicrous.

0 Replies

@Robert Gentel,

Most definately - he is loving this - it was exactly what he knew would happen.

0 Replies

@maporsche,

maporsche wrote:

As far as I know, the cartoon artist isn't a KKK clansman, so any "undertone" that people think is there is at the very least, completely unsupported.

But you have no problem with wondering aloud, surmising that people who do find this racist, are in fact racists themselves.

As far as you know, those who find this racist aren't klansmen either.

1 Reply

@chai2,

I think that those who are injecting race into this cartoon are doing so for a very specific reason, yes.

I don't know where I might have called anyone racist though.

1 Reply

@maporsche,

maporsche wrote:

I think that those who are injecting race into this cartoon are doing so for a very specific reason, yes.

I don't know where I might have called anyone racist though.

But you don't think that the artist drew it for a very specific reason?

Why are you so bent on questioning the motives of those who don't like the cartoon, while defending those of they who drew and printed it? You don't know the truth of either situation, yet you feel it's appropriate to defend one and attack the other.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Linkat,

Linkat wrote:

I agree he may have used this in regard to anyone in the White House - I just think that the added feature of a black President was a bonus for him and he had an out - it wasn't the President - as others have described. Although I am fairly confident he realized that this could be inferred as the President w/a racial twist giving the cartoon more controversy rather than just being poor taste about a poor woman being seriously injured.

And he may have intended the monkey to portray Santa Claus for all we know of what he intended in addition to suggesting that the stimulous package was written by a monkey. So what is more racist do you think? To be aware of and avoid anything that even might remotely be construed as racist or racially tinged or racially implicated when discussing anything the President is involved in? Or to treat the President exactly as you (rhetorical 'you') would treat anybody in his position?

1 Reply

@Setanta,

Setanta wrote:

Certainly it says something about the current President, Mr. Brain Dead Poster Boy. Obama has been in office for one month. The overwhelming focus of attention on his fledgling administration has been the stimulus package. When it is discussed in media sources, they don't discuss the 535 authors or potential authors in the Congress, they discuss Mr. Obama's stimulus package. You are free to bury your head in the sand, or to take snide positions by ignoring the obvious--don't expect me to buy into your bullshit, though.

That's precisely the point, Set. Just like Iraq was Bush's war despite the input from myriad different people - the stimulus package will forever be Obama's in the public lexicon. So it would be obvious that the chimp was supposed to be Obama. The denial of the obvious by the rightwingnut apologists is staggering.

By the way, - Maporsche - do I get any points for abstaining from comment on a racially charged subject? Or does my one comment thus far still support your contention that I am obsessed by such things?

2 Replies

@Foxfyre,

Here are some reasons why the implication is not far fetched:

http://abajournal.com/news/divorce_lawyer_banished_after_calling_black_court_staffer_a_little_monkey/
Divorce Lawyer Banished After Calling Black Court Staffer ‘A Little Monkey’

and here
http://www.jackandjillpolitics.com/2009/02/the-connection-between-blacks-as-apes-and-police-brutality/

As I stated before this is an experienced political cartoonist. He knows what he is doing and is not choosing this monkey and situation haphazardly - I doubt he is even racist, but knew he could cause quite a stir by using the monkey. And he could say no it isn't racist because (like you said many individuals were involved with the stimulous package) - but come on - unless you are quite naivee you know he wanted that racial undertone.

1 Reply

@snood,

I wouldn't classify myself as right-wing although I voted for McCain. And even though I would have prefered McCain it is obvious what the cartoonist was doing.

And anyone with intelligence would be able to reason this out. It isn't like some kid making it up - this is some one experienced in these sorts of things.

2 Replies

Is This Cartoon Racist?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know