Al Sharpton Goes Ape Over NY Post Cartoon

[Tricky]

Honestly, I don't think it crossed the editor's mind.

Then, as I say, he is not a good editor. One part of their job is to evaluate articles for their content and how they would be perceived.

I don't think an editor should automatically exclude a cartoon because it MIGHT be perceived as racist. If you excluded anything that MIGHT be offensive, you'd only be left with the ads.

I agree with you, and I'm not suggesting that the Post shouldn't have printed it. I'm only saying that it is likely that they were aware of the liklihood that juxtaposing "black" and "ape" was going to cause a ruckus. They are perfectly within their right to cause such a ruckus.

I just think that if they try to look all innocent and naive, claiming that they were unaware of a long-running social perception then I must snort with disbelief. You don't get to be the editor of a big newspaper in a major metropolitan area by being naive.

 

[BPSCG]

Now it's not just racist - it's advocating assasination

Oh, good grief...

The head of the NAACP on Saturday urged readers to boycott the New York Post, calling a cartoon that the newspaper published an invitation to assassinate President Barack Obama.

Benjamin Todd Jealous, president of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, called on the tabloid to remove editor-in-chief Col Allan, as well as longtime cartoonist Sean Delonas.

Earlier this week, the newspaper apologized to anyone who might have been offended by the image printed Wednesday, which some say likens Obama to a violent chimpanzee gunned down by police in Connecticut.
Jealous said the cartoon was "an invitation to assassination."

(...snip...)

NAACP Chairman Julian Bond called the publication of the cartoon "thoughtlessness taken to the extreme. ... Anyone who is not offended by it does not have any sensitivity."

Bond is well-known for his sensitivity:

Civil rights activist and NAACP Chairman Julian Bond delivered a blistering partisan speech at Fayetteville State University in North Carolina last night, equating the Republican Party with the Nazi Party and characterizing Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and her predecessor, Colin Powell, as tokens.

"The Republican Party would have the American flag and the swastika flying side by side," he charged.

(...snip...)

The harsh partisan rhetoric from Bond should not have surprised anyone who has followed him in recent years.

In July 2001, Bond said, "[Bush] has selected nominees from the Taliban wing of American politics, appeased the wretched appetites of the extreme right wing, and chosen Cabinet officials whose devotion to the Confederacy is nearly canine in its uncritical affection."

It appears the NAACP wants to walk the same road to irrelevancy that Sharpton is treading.

 

[Meadmaker]

Agreed. There's nothing that even loosely connects the chimp with the spending bill. The cartoonist might just as reasonably worked Alex Rodriguez holding a syringe into the cartoon, instead of the chimp.

The reference was to 1000 monkeys with typewriters writing the works of Shakespeare.

The stimulus bill was a whole bunch of random, disconnected, spending items thrown together haphazardly, as if by a chimp with a typewriter.

At least, that was my immediate reaction upon seeing the cartoon, and I'm fairly confident that was the intent of the writer. It just seems obvious to me.

 

[Tsukasa Buddha]

The reference was to 1000 monkeys with typewriters writing the works of Shakespeare.

The stimulus bill was a whole bunch of random, disconnected, spending items thrown together haphazardly, as if by a chimp with a typewriter.

At least, that was my immediate reaction upon seeing the cartoon, and I'm fairly confident that was the intent of the writer. It just seems obvious to me.

Heh, I didn't get it at all . I mean, that finally explained it to me, but it is seems obtuse to me.

 

[Meadmaker]

Heh, I didn't get it at all . I mean, that finally explained it to me, but it is seems obtuse to me.

I guess I was just on the same wavelength as the cartoonist, but that is what immediately leapt out at me. It fits perfectly, and none of the other interpretations make any sense.

 

[Cicero]

"Al Sharpton goes ape" is a hair-raisingly racist remark.

If I mentioned Don King, I could understand the "hair-raising," but it is the predisposition of the reader who seeks out racism in non pc phrases.

 

[Merko]

I don't think the intent was racist. But on the other hand, the intended joke appears to be so lame that it's understandable if people started reading all kinds of things into it.

I don't buy the '1000 monkeys' reference. They shot 1 monkey. If the reference was that this was one of 1000 monkeys writing the bill (which would have been a fair enough comic stab), then what difference does it make if you shoot one of them? So ultimately I think that interpretation makes just as much (or as little) sense as the racist interpretation.

My interpretation goes a little like this: This bill is just so bad. I mean, it's written by the Democrats, so it must be bad. I don't really know why, but it's bad. It's so bad that your mama smells.. hmm.. that doesn't work out. It's so bad that it must have been written by a monkey! Hahahaha!

 

[Meadmaker]

I don't buy the '1000 monkeys' reference. They shot 1 monkey.

As others pointed out, 1 monkey, given time, coud also write the works of Shakespeare, but for some reason the reference is usually to 1000 monkeys.

The author of the cartoon has not, as far as I know, explained what he was thinking, but I would be very surprised if it were anything else.

 

[latent aaaack]

There's no way both an editor at a major newspaper and an experienced cartoonist who needs to always constantly follow the news for their job could look at the final product and be unaware that it would offend blacks and be interpreted as racist by many.

I think it represents what I've long suspected - that the election of a black president only has the potential to work against racial tolerance and sensitivity ironically for several reasons. One reason - it tends to make those who were previously tolerant happy and/or complacent about the progress of blacks and race related issues. Simultaneously it makes those who weren't tolerant angry, more convinced that blacks are no longer too disadvantaged to be sensitive towards generally, and more embolded to express their beliefs freely. When the black president is a democrat and percieved as particularly liberal, radical (Obama does have more radical assocations than most politicians to be fair). and in opposition or different in many ways to the segments of society that tend to be the most racist then the overall effect is, if anything, away from the trend of racial progress. The mass media is simply too stupid to serve as a medium for and informer on complex issues such as race and always hooks onto very simple childish narratives.

 

[Cicero]

There's no way both an editor at a major newspaper and an experienced cartoonist who needs to always constantly follow the news for their job could look at the final product and be unaware that it would offend blacks and be interpreted as racist by many.

I think it represents what I've long suspected - that the election of a black president only has the potential to work against racial tolerance and sensitivity ironically for several reasons. One reason - it tends to make those who were previously tolerant happy and/or complacent about the progress of blacks and race related issues. Simultaneously it makes those who weren't tolerant angry, more convinced that blacks are no longer too disadvantaged to be sensitive towards generally, and more embolded to express their beliefs freely. When the black president is a democrat and percieved as particularly liberal, radical (Obama does have more radical assocations than most politicians to be fair). and in opposition or different in many ways to the segments of society that tend to be the most racist then the overall effect is, if anything, away from the trend of racial progress. The mass media is simply too stupid to serve as a medium for and informer on complex issues such as race and always hooks onto very simple childish narratives.

In the immortal words of Attorney General, Eric Holder, "We’re All Cowards."

There was a relatively obscure figure who said, "Conscience doth make cowards of us all." But who can compete with the wisdom of Eric the Great?

 

[BPSCG]

The Washington Post has a weekly humor column in its Sunday magazine, written by Gene Weingarten, and called "Below the Beltway."

This past Sunday's column was called, "Monkey Business." Here is the beginning of that column:

In a study described recently in the New York Times, men and women were shown various types of sexually explicit videos, and sensors were attached to their private parts to measure their physical arousal. The subjects were also asked to rate their degree of arousal themselves.

The study found that men were completely predictable: Straight men reported they were turned on only by images of women, and the machine confirmed that. Same with gay men and images of men. But while women of both orientations reported similarly gender-specific responses, the machine called them liars. The sensors reported that all women were turned on by absolutely everything ... including videos of bonobos having sex. Bonobos are apes.

The Times treated this as social anthropology. The story droned on for what seemed like 200 pages and wrestled with grave epistemological issues involving the Cartesian nexus of mind and body. I opted instead for a few minutes on the phone with my friend Gina Barreca, the feminist scholar.

Gene: So, from a highly scientific perspective, can we agree this study establishes that, deep in their hearts, all women are slutbunnies?

Gina: How many pairs of shoes do you own, and when was the last time you altered your hairstyle?

Gene: Don't change the subject.

Gina: I am not changing the subject.

Gene:

Gina: Trust me.

Gene: Two, one black and one brown. And I have been getting the same haircut since 1959. I call it the Howdy Doody.

Gina: That is the answer to your question. What this study has confirmed is what we have always known: Women are more complicated and more interesting than men in all observable ways. This includes our appetites in general, and our sexual response in particular. Our sexual response is constructed like the Chartres cathedral, with flying buttresses and Romanesque friezes and colonnades and catafalques and labyrinthine passageways said to have mystical powers. Men's sexual response is constructed like a rubber-band slingshot.

Gene: I want to say one word. That word would be "bonobo."

Gina: Oh, I can explain that. It's simple recognition. Every woman's sexual history includes at least one bonobo. "Oh, look, that's Vinnie from ninth grade!"

Please click on this link to see the cartoon that accompanied the column.

The Post ran an apology, in its print edition (evidently not on the web site):

The headline, illustration, and text of 'Below the Beltway,' a column in The Washington Post Magazine today, may cause offense to readers. The magazine was was printed before a widely publicized incident last week in which a chimpanzee attacked and badly mauled a woman in Stamford, Conn. In addition, the image and text inadvertently may conjure racial stereotypes that The Post does not countenance. We regret the lapse.

Eric Holder is right. We are a bunch of cowards. We are now afraid to show a cartoon of an ape in any context at all, and feel the need to apologize for reporting research that suggests women are sexually aroused by the sight of apes having sex because some hypersensitive idiots may see a racial component.

 

[Cicero]

Eric Holder is right. We are a bunch of cowards. We are now afraid to show a cartoon of an ape in any context at all, and feel the need to apologize for reporting research that suggests women are sexually aroused by the sight of apes having sex because some hypersensitive idiots may see a racial component.

"Funny. When I think of racial cowards, I think of Barack Obama at Jeremiah Wright’s church, sitting there week after week, year after year, saying nothing about the separatist demagoguery echoing from the pulpit to the pews.

When I think of racial cowards, I think of all the navel-gazers who fret about poisonous racial dialogue, but say nothing about “My President Is Black” bigotry.

When I think of racial cowards, I think of the people cowed by mau-mau-er Al Sharpton — now attacking the NYPost over a cartoon lampooning that crazy dead chimp.

When I think of racial cowards, I think of the folks who enable p.c. thugs to cry racism over “That One” and “Thug Thizzle” and “tricked out.”

Holder doesn’t want an honest dialogue about race. In the Age of Obama, “talking enough with each other about race” means the rest of us shutting up while being subjected to lectures about our insensitivity and insufficient integration on the weekends."

http://michellemalkin.com/2009/02/18/holder-a-nation-of-cowards/

 

[Cylinder]

Dissent is patriotic.
Dissent is racist.

 

[Mumbles]

"Funny. When I think of racial cowards, I think of Barack Obama at Jeremiah Wright’s church, sitting there week after week, year after year, saying nothing about the separatist demagoguery echoing from the pulpit to the pews.

When I think of racial cowards, I think of all the navel-gazers who fret about poisonous racial dialogue, but say nothing about “My President Is Black” bigotry.

When I think of racial cowards, I think of the people cowed by mau-mau-er Al Sharpton — now attacking the NYPost over a cartoon lampooning that crazy dead chimp.

When I think of racial cowards, I think of the folks who enable p.c. thugs to cry racism over “That One” and “Thug Thizzle” and “tricked out.”

Holder doesn’t want an honest dialogue about race. In the Age of Obama, “talking enough with each other about race” means the rest of us shutting up while being subjected to lectures about our insensitivity and insufficient integration on the weekends."

http://michellemalkin.com/2009/02/18/holder-a-nation-of-cowards/

Michele Malkin wrote a book in favor of the internment of Japanese-Amerricans during WW2, and recently defended "Barack the Magic Negro" just before making some silly claim about how "My President is Black" is racist (it's not - although it is kinda dumb.). Just thought I'd point that one out. Basically, for all of her rants about Al Sharpton, she's really no better these days - two fools famous for being loud and zealous.

...Although, come to think of it, that's basically all of cable news.

 

[BPSCG]

"Funny. When I think of racial cowards, I think of Barack Obama at Jeremiah Wright’s church, sitting there week after week, year after year, saying nothing about the separatist demagoguery echoing from the pulpit to the pews.

When I think of racial cowards, I think of all the navel-gazers who fret about poisonous racial dialogue, but say nothing about “My President Is Black” bigotry.

When I think of racial cowards, I think of the people cowed by mau-mau-er Al Sharpton — now attacking the NYPost over a cartoon lampooning that crazy dead chimp.

When I think of racial cowards, I think of the folks who enable p.c. thugs to cry racism over “That One” and “Thug Thizzle” and “tricked out.”

Holder doesn’t want an honest dialogue about race. In the Age of Obama, “talking enough with each other about race” means the rest of us shutting up while being subjected to lectures about our insensitivity and insufficient integration on the weekends."

http://michellemalkin.com/2009/02/18/holder-a-nation-of-cowards/

Michele Malkin wrote a book in favor of the internment of Japanese-Amerricans during WW2, and recently defended "Barack the Magic Negro" just before making some silly claim about how "My President is Black" is racist (it's not - although it is kinda dumb.). Just thought I'd point that one out. Basically, for all of her rants about Al Sharpton, she's really no better these days - two fools famous for being loud and zealous.

So because she may be wrong about one thing, she is perforce wrong about everything else.

Wouldn't a courageous Barack Obama have confronted Jeremiah Wright's racism head-on instead of listening to it for twenty years? You don't think Malkin has a good point there?

 

[Cicero]

Michele Malkin wrote a book in favor of the internment of Japanese-Amerricans during WW2, and recently defended "Barack the Magic Negro" just before making some silly claim about how "My President is Black" is racist (it's not - although it is kinda dumb.). Just thought I'd point that one out. Basically, for all of her rants about Al Sharpton, she's really no better these days - two fools famous for being loud and zealous.

...Although, come to think of it, that's basically all of cable news.

Well, Malkin has a lot of company in favor of FDR's decision to intern Japanese Americans after Pearl. Future Chief Justice, Earl Warren supported the action and the ACLU national office never challenged the internment. Could liberal icons such as FDR, Earl and the ACLU squeeze into your "loud and zealous" characterization?

 

[Tsukasa Buddha]

"Funny. When I think of racial cowards, I think of Barack Obama at Jeremiah Wright’s church, sitting there week after week, year after year, saying nothing about the separatist demagoguery echoing from the pulpit to the pews.

When I think of racial cowards, I think of all the navel-gazers who fret about poisonous racial dialogue, but say nothing about “My President Is Black” bigotry.

When I think of racial cowards, I think of the people cowed by mau-mau-er Al Sharpton — now attacking the NYPost over a cartoon lampooning that crazy dead chimp.

When I think of racial cowards, I think of the folks who enable p.c. thugs to cry racism over “That One” and “Thug Thizzle” and “tricked out.”

Holder doesn’t want an honest dialogue about race. In the Age of Obama, “talking enough with each other about race” means the rest of us shutting up while being subjected to lectures about our insensitivity and insufficient integration on the weekends."

http://michellemalkin.com/2009/02/18/holder-a-nation-of-cowards/

He, I find the subtle irony hilarious in that all those examples are when race issues bother "us".

 

[Freddy]

Heh, I didn't get it at all . I mean, that finally explained it to me, but it is seems obtuse to me.

Any joke that requires an explanation merely not to appear racist probably isn't very funny. Really, any joke that requires an explanation at all isn't funny.

 

[Cicero]

He, I find the subtle irony hilarious in that all those examples are when race issues bother "us".

Being Filipino, what could Malkin possibly know about racism?

 

[Tsukasa Buddha]

Being Filipino, what could Malkin possibly know about racism?

... Okaaay. Except that has nothing to do with what she wrote. She wrote about those darn uppity blacks and their appeasers. If you'll note, she even set up the "us" v "them" explicitly in her last sentence.

She wrote nothing about substantial issues like the racial gap in education, economic inequality, high crime rates, etc.

Nope, let's just whine about black people saying mean things that make us feel bad.