News-Record.com

Nice try, it's the House and the Senate that write the bills, the President signs them.

If anyone should be offended its me, associating Obama with a my family of chimps.

An interesting interpretive case. The problem is that there's no obvious connection between a rampaging chimp and the stimulus package, and so reader are forced into ascribing an agent (the "author" of the stimulus package) for which the chimp stands as a symbol.

Personally, I would have, I think, read the chimp as a symbol of disembodied chaos, the message being something like "this stimulus package is a helter-skelter melange of this and that with no coherent thought behind it besides what a rampaging chimp could have mustered." But that interpretation depends on my knowledge of how the bill was actually written (Obama having had, sadly enough, little to do with it) and my opinion of the bill as a helter-skelter melange of this and that with no coherent thought behind it.

At the same time, it certainly would have occurred to me that the racial intepretation would be made by many people. And I would have wondered whether the author was subtly making the connection with Obama, while preparing himself to hide behind an interpretation like the above.

All lies and jest.

A man sees what he wants to see and disregards the rest.

Bingo, Tired of Boxing!

Besides, this chimp was said to have been entirely to intelligent to have penned this disastrous, "let's bleep our children and grandchildren" legislation in order to pay off every liberal group that supported us!

Cartoons are a tough call sometimes. I've made my own mistakes.
But iI definitely would not have run this one.

Racial questions aside, I'm a bit put off by how violent this cartoon is. It's a bit too graphic for my tastes, as far as a family newspaper is concerned. I think you made the right call, Allen.

I have read dozens of comments on various sites and am quite concerned with people's lack of understanding and/or acceptance with the FACT that the Post's cartoon was going to appear, insensitive, violent and yes racist (not to some, but many). Whether it's your belief or not, the editor should have known, the artist should have known, and to everyone posting comments indicating that it's not and what's wrong with us...all I can say is "give me a break!"

So political cartoons that are, what, controversial--that might offend someone--shouldn't be published? What about photos of a black kid eating a watermelon?

It's a very slippery slope when the journalistic criterion becomes whether an image offends someone. I could certainly defend an editor who said, "sure, some people will take this the wrong way, but too bad for them; their misinterpretation doesn't constitute my standard."

Sometimes the guys who work for newspapers assume people read the newspaper every day and this is not necessesarily true. If somebody didn't see the thing about the monkey getting shot and they picked up the paper today, they would really be clueless here and then could jump to conclusions.

Maybe we could come up with a list for the benefit of dumb white guys who grew up in New England or rural mid-America.

#1 Don't call black guys "boy".
#2 No monkeys.
#3 Brian 444 mentioned the watermelon
#4 Nooses
#5 Inside-out traffic cones that look like KKK hoods

Any others?

For those who don't read the newspaper every day, the N&R published a photo of a black kid eating a watermelon. It offended a number of readers.

You have made a mountain out of a molehill. If you choose to take offense where none was meant, you will have a full-time job. Regarding the comment about not everyone reading the paper every day, and so these folks might jump to conclusions, there is nothing that can be done about that. This chimp story was huge, reported on every TV station and many programs. Sorry, ignorance is not a defense. Anyone in the public arena must have a thick skin.

Cartoon.

I am constantly bombarded with hateful media that denigrates my faith. I disregard it. Such things say nothing about God, and volumes about those who create them.
You.
Know,
Not.

Why is it the N&R is soooo slooooowwww to post a comment about the white Police Officer being found not guilty today?????

I'm sure having to post the headline is killing you guys.

Since president Pelosi, wrote this porklus bill, what does it have to do with Obama?
Just act like it was Bush, and get over it.
i saw this and never once linked
it to Obama.