Is the NY Post comparing Obama to a chimp?
February 18, 2009 10:28 am ET by Eric Boehlert
Here's the cartoon from today's paper:
Notes Sam Stein at the Huffington Post:
At its most benign, the cartoon suggests that the stimulus bill was so bad, monkeys may as well have written it. Most provocatively, it compares the president to a rabid chimp. Either way, the incorporation of violence and (on a darker level) race into politics is bound to be controversial.
The other right-wing media mogul you should worry about
Palin's book and Obama's bow: a media week to forget
Media Matters: The Palin chronicles
Since Obama did not write the bill, the suggestion you made is invalid, after all congress wrote the bill. It is just another feeble attempt to fan the fires of partisanship. I also wonder if Stein had any comments about the vile cartoons that were published and posted by liberals against conservative. I strongly doubt it, unless he indicated he was in total agreement with them.
You're a typical unhinged and factually challenged righty....always whining you are the victim while dimissing anything to the contrary. Keep desperately tossing our strawmen. The world laughs at you and your ilk.
I certainly would like to hear what some liberals had to say about similar cartoons (perhaps those that captured Cheney's hunting trip). Any level of violence, implied or not, in political cartoons should not be justified if they are meant to be humorous, and I am sure that there are critics on both sides of the aisle when it comes to these.
The unfortunate plight of this cartoon is that it involves an image that can easily be misconstrued as being offensive to a race. While you may not make the connection, some people do, thanks to historical images and media assignments. While Obama may not have written the stimulus bill, it was portrayed as his project. The media on both sides made it appear that Obama was its architect, and therefore people are going to make the indirect connection.
As someone indicated in the remarks to Mr. Stein, anyone laughing at this should take a good hard look at themselves in the mirror.
<i>The unfortunate plight of this cartoon is that it involves an image that can easily be misconstrued as being offensive to a race.</i>
Do you think that the editors of the Post were somehow unaware of that? They knew the cartoon could and would be construed as racially offensive, and they pretty obviously didn't care, because they went ahead and ran it anyway.
Do you think that the editors of the Post were somehow unaware of that? They knew the cartoon could and would be construed as racially offensive, and they pretty obviously didn't care, because they went ahead and ran it anyway.
They were totally aware and knew that Sean Delonas was a hack to begin with. This is the same NY Post that has allowed Delonas to post political cartoons that mocked gay-rights activism, feminism, and (yes!) Al Sharpton himself.
Of course, he's also well-known for plagiarizing himself.
I don't find humor in deaths, period. This was a pretty serious mistake on the Post's part and ought to apologize for the graphic nature of the cartoon.
President Bush was constantly referred to as a chimp. There's even a blog called The Smirking Chimp, meaning the former prez.
Carolyn Kay
MakeThemAccountable.com
As the writer of this article mentioned, at its best, The Post is saying that the bill was written by a monkey, as in, "Even a monkey could do it." At its worst, they're invoking Obama, and him being shot for writing said bill. Who else would they be talking about? We've already had one apologist on here talking about "Congress" wrote the bill, which is correct, but Obama was the driver, the architect of it, and the main protagonist for said stimulus bill. I don't think that this cartoon could be any other thing rather than calling out Obama, and showing it in a super violent way.
To the first poster on here, can you show us some of these cartoons where republican politicians were shown being gunned down? Or are you just imagining that these cartoons happened? Or do you just assume that they exist? If they do exist, then yes, those are just as bad. See, thing is, most liberals that I know can call BS on their own side when they think what they're doing is BS. Most of the time, this is portrayed in the conservative media (ie, the MSM) as bitter infighting in the democratic party, but the republicans normally (as we saw with the actual stimulus bill) march in lockstep, and do what they're told, regardless of how that affects, you know, America.
When I first glanced at the above, I thought about the old saw, "an infinite # of primates, an infinite # number of typewriters and at some time all the great works will come forth" (or something to that effect). However one looks at the cartoon, it should not be seen as humor, but at the same time, I don't see any racial undertones, just a failed attempt to make a point.
I think that they used the image of a monkey due to the savage attack that a woman incurred at the hands of a chimp, whereas, I think she was either killed, or was very close to being killed by the actual chimp.
Someone at the Post should have some editorial savvy and get on things like this, but something tells me, that won't happen.
Oh, I certainly think the chimp attack lead the way here. As I said, a failed attempt at humor, big city style.
In regards to cartoons depicting the murder of R political figures, I can only think of the movie by the Canadian (forget his name) depicting the assassination of gwb.. Another sick attempt at humor, I believe.
I can't help but quote The Simpsons' Montgomery Burns when he hired out the monkeys and the typewriters. He pulled a piece of paper from one monkey's work station...
"It was the best of times it was the blurst of times. Stupid monkey!"
One other note regarding the post on Fluffinton. Aren't most political cartooons meant to be controversial?
Most are meant to be satire. Satire can be controversial, but they are mostly to show the controversy over something else in a different light, usually a humorous one.
However, usually the depiction of death in political cartoons crosses the line of satire, whether it be human or animal. Death, to me, is a cold shower on humor and turns satire into something much darker. And to the extremist, it can become a model for something likely not intended by the cartoonist.
Things probably would have been different if the animal wasn't a chimpanzee or if the chimp was not shot to death. However, this just is no laughing matter when historically-sensitive images and stereotypes are used. The Post should have known this was going to happen.
But then again it has people reading the newspaper, right?
Don't assume that those of us outraged by this cartoon were not outraged by the violent cartoons and images used to slander Bush or any other president.
I feel death has no place in political cartoons that are meant to satire in a humorous way, whether it be Obama, Bush, or any politician. I would not even wish it on my worst enemies.