Feb 21 2009
PC-Induced Outrage Over Chimp Cartoon Reeks of Idiocy
I’m sure by now all of you have heard about the outrage over a recent political cartoon from the New York Post that shows two policemen shooting a chimpanzee. If only the American public could get this mad at Congress for being so inept.
Some people are saying the cartoon is racist because it portrays President Barack Obama as a primate. Sean Delonas, the artist of the controversial cartoon, says the chimp is supposed to represent those in Washington who passed the gargantuan stimulus bill. Sure, Obama pushed for the bill, but so did dozens of others. In any case, the Post now finds itself besieged from all sides by legions of angry people, including the attention-grabbing, race-baiting Rev. Al Sharpton. Personally, I don’t think there is anything “reverent” about this guy.
Sharpton claims that the cartoon features a racist caricature of Obama, and if anyone knows about racist caricatures, it is Al Sharpton. During the 1991 Crown Heights Riot in New York City, Sharpton referred to Jews as “diamond merchants.”
So is the outrage justified? I don’t think so, although I thought the cartoon itself was kind of dumb. But considering the fact that its real target was the entire idioterati of Washington and not just the president, the only one who should feel insulted here is the chimp.
BBC News reports that the Post issued an apology yesterday “to those who were offended by the image.” As far as this blogger is concerned, the newspaper had absolutely nothing to apologize for. Instead of issuing a mea culpa, the Post should have told Sharptooth and others like him to take their accusations and stick them where the sun don’t shine.
And speaking of loudmouths, once-great filmmaker Spike Lee has jumped into the fray. Lee says we need to boycott the “racist” Post. I have a better idea: Let’s boycott his lousy movies instead! Lee’s tongue was always on overdrive, but I never minded that in the past because he made such great films like Do the Right Thing and Malcolm X. But Lee hasn’t made a good movie in years, so now he is just irritating. In fact, his last movie, The Miracle at St. Anna, was so awful it could have been made by that dead chimp from the cartoon.
- Why the ‘NY Post’ Has forced Me to Boycott News Corp Products Until Further Notice
- “Going Green = $4 Per Gallon” by Tom DeWeese | The Rational Argumentator
- After The Election: What Now for Political Cartoonists? (Political Cartoon)
- Throw Down the Racist Card
- Standing in the Unemployment Line: The Recession’s Over, Pass It On
Considering the cartoonist SAID his idea was to target “those in Washington who passed the gargantuan stimulus bill”, but did so AFTER the criticism began to mount, it sounds to me like an excuse. What part of that “target” seems anything like a monkey?
Sorry, but as a political cartoonist, he should know that “monkeys” are and have been common derogatory descriptions of blacks, and any use of that metaphor where it can be misconstrued as pertaining to the first black President is a stupid misuse of the figure.
At best, it shows the man’s insensitivity to others, and at worst, it shows a blatant disregard of historic racial attitudes, if not a deliberate use of one of the worst ones out there.
I don’t buy the excuse, nor your defense of it.
“Considering the cartoonist SAID his idea was to target “those in Washington who passed the gargantuan stimulus bill”, but did so AFTER the criticism began to mount, it sounds to me like an excuse.”
Is there any evidence that he actually meant to specifically portray Obama as a chimp, and not Washington as a whole? Personally, I would not have done this myself, and if he really had meant for the chimp to represent Obama, then it certainly would have been deplorable, but it looks to me like he meant to parody the recent chimp episode in Conn. and have the govt be portrayed by the primate, and until someone shows me actual evidence (and not just assumptions) that he meant otherwise, then I don’t think it’s that big a deal.
the point is that this is a cartoon, nothing more. And yet, instead of a real debate over the massive spending of money that we don’t have to spend, we get talking heads yelling about a stupid cartoon.
Just another sign of the bread and circuses America that so many have bought into.
The cartoon, within itself, alludes to Obama, as he has become synonymous with the Stimulus bill, when it mentions that bill, and the need (now that the chimp is dead) for a new author.
THAT is as clear as it needs to be, the “Author” of the bill was not some amorphous “Washington”, but is seen as being Obama, since he is the President - it is HIS bill.
The excuse is hogwash. If he had truly meant Washington, he could have used the familiar Uncle Sam figure, or the also oft used fat businessmen figures so often used in this manner.
I can see the temptation to somehow work the chimp into a cartoon, but the way he did it is so transparent it stinks.
If what he says were so easy to see, there wouldn’t be any controversy!
Congress wrote the package, not Obama, if anything then it’s about Congress being a bunch of monkey’s that need to be shot.
I didn’t find it racist, but it is a loaded image to say the least.
It was only a matter of time before something would be construed as racist.
When I first saw the cartoon, I didn’t get the racism behind it. I knew the stimulus bill was written by the hacks in D.C. and was thinking that a monkey could do better.
I think the artist lost something by using the recent chimp incident - it was a big story in his part of the country, but not elsewhere.
Besides, why was it OK to portray Bush as a monkey or chimp? Oh wait. He is a Republican.
And AMEN libertarianvegan.
Im just sayin’, it’s not that funny… and as far as racisism goes. Im really not thinking it’s a very impressive effort on that level either. I simply can’t seem to get worked up about it one way or the other.